Gujarat Court April 1969 Judgments
Village Panchayat Jaspur Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-1969
Reported in: (1970)11GLR695
P.N. Bhagwati, C.J.1. These two petitions raise a short question as to the validity of Section 96 Sub-section (4) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act of 1961). The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 1596 of 1968 is the Jaspur Gram Panchayat while the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 363 of 1969 is the Khodiyar Gram Panchayat. Both these gram panchayats are bodies corporate constituted under the Act of 1961 for the respective grams of Jaspur and Khodiyar. Though Jaspur and Khodiyar are situated in different revenue districts, they adjoin each other and have part of their boundary common. It was common ground between the parties that Survey No. 391 which constitutes grazing land in village Jaspur was originally Government land and it was vested by Government in Jaspur Village Panchayat as then constituted sometime in June 1950 under Section 28B of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1933 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1933) and so al...
Tag this Judgment!Khachar Rana Laxman and anr. Vs. Dhadhal Hathiyabhai Mulubhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Guj115
Shelat, J.1. The facts giving rise to this appeal, broadly stated, are that on 16-3-1959 the respondents had filed an application (Varsa Case) No. 30/58 in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) Surendranagar for obtaining the Letters of Administration, with the Will annexed on the basis of a will dated 11-9-1935 executed by Bhura Punja Khachar who died at Sayla on 25-8-1958. The appellants before this Court who were opponents in that proceeding resisted the same. After hearing the parties, the Letters of Administration with the Will annexed were directed by the Court to be issued in favour of the respondents. After that decision was given, the appellants learnt from Mr. Kantilal N. Vora, an advocate of Muli, about deceased Khachar Bhura Punja having made his last Will on 17-11-1956, and the same was duly attested and registered. He also told them that he had written the same at his instance, and had that will with him. That led them to file Misc. Application No. 8/60 in the same Court, f...
Tag this Judgment!Vaghela Dahyabhai Chaturbhai Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-1969
Reported in: (1970)11GLR386
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The petitioners who are occupying Bet or Bhatha lands in the rivers in question challenge in these petitions the Government Resolution, dated December 28,1966, by which in cancellation of the existing order regarding the disposal of Bet and Bhatha lands by public auction, the Government has directed the said procedure to be discontinued with effect from January 1, 1967, and has directed the authorities to dispose of the lands as per the detailed instructions given therein.2. The petitioners claim in these petitions that they were cultivating these lands as tenants except the petitioner in Sp. C.A. No. 1079 of 1967 who claims to be a permanent tenant, the case of the petitioners was that at the relevant time they had been given Eksali;'. e. one year leases on the expiry of which their right of renewal was completely taken away by the aforesaid circular. The circular had completely fettered the discretion of the competent authorities under the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Doongarsee and Sons and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Guj46
Bhagwati, C.J.1. The petitioners are owners of different pieces of land forming one compact block situate at village Vasana, City Taluka, Ahmedabad District. The third respondent society is a co-operative housing society formed with the object of enabling its members to construct houses and registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 - now deemed to be registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. The petitioners' lands being well situate, the third respondent society moved the State Government to acquire the petitioners' lands for construction of houses by its members and the State Government accordingly issued a notification dated 20th May, 1961 under Section 4 stating inter alia that the petitioners' lands were likely to be needed for a public purpose, namely, for construction of houses for members of Shri Yogeshwar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Within thirty days of the issue of this notification some of the petitioners filed their objections a...
Tag this Judgment!Dosabhai Ratansha Keravala Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-1969
Reported in: (1970)11GLR361
P.N. Bhagwati, C.J.1. These three petitions challenge the validity of notification dated 1st September 1964 issued by the State Government under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect of certain lands belonging to the petitioners. The facts are rather material and may be briefly stated as follows: The petitioners are owners of different pieces of land forming one compact block situate in village Vastrapur on the outskirts of Ahmedabad City. The third respondent society is co-operative housing society formed with the object of enabling its members to construct houses and registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 now deemed to be registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. The petitioners' lands being well situated, the third respondent society moved the State Government to acquire the petitioners' lands for construction of houses by its members and the State Government accordingly issued a notification dated 19th June 1961 under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!A Firm of Ramprasad Chhotalal and ors. Vs. Bai Reva
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Guj269
Shelat, J. 1. The suit from which this appeal arises was instituted by the respondent-plaintiff in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) at Ahmedabad for recovering in all a sum of Rs. 17,131-86 p. Due as per statement of accounts dated 27-10-1954 with future interest and costs of the suit, against the defendants-appellants. 2-5. Xx xx xx xx2. Two points have been urged by Mr. Mody, the learned advocate for the appellants, before us. The first is that the trial court has erred in holding that the amount due from defendant No. 1 the firm running in the name of Ramprasad Chhotalal was in the nature of a deposit so as to be governed for the purpose of limitation by Art. 60 of the Indian Limitation Act. According to him, it was merely a loan and not a deposit and would therefore, be governed by Art. 57 or 59 of the Indian Limitation Act. As the period of Limitation in that event commences from the date when the loan is made, this suit filed after a period of three years provided for the same...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedabad Miscellaneous Industrial Workers' Union Vs. the Electricity ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-01-1969
Reported in: (1970)11GLR628; (1970)IILLJ716Guj
Bhagwati, C.J.1. Ordinarily in the field of industrial law disputes which come to this Court are industrial disputes between an employer on the one hand and an employee or union of employees on the other, but this case is rather unusual in that it brings to the Court a dispute between two unions of employees. The petitioner union registered under the provisions of the Indian Trade Unions Act, 1926, and prior to the order of the Registrar dated 26th December 1968, which is impugned in this petition, it was registered as a representative union for the following industry, namely, generation and/or supply and/or transmission of electrical energy (hereinafter referred to as the electrical industry) in the local area of Ahmedabad City Municipal Borough, Ahmedabad Cantonment and the village of Sabarmati (hereinafter referred to as the local area of Ahmedabad) under S. 14 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The first respondent union is also a trade union registered under the provisi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›