Gujarat Court March 1970 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.
Rambhai Hasaram Chandani Vs. Khengar Mahiji and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-10-1970
Reported in: (1971)12GLR411
N.G. Shelat, J.1. The facts giving rise to this application in revision are quite simple. On a complaint made by the petitioner before the police against the opponent Bharvad Khengar Mahiji of Barejadi village, near Ahmedabad, in respect of an offence under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code, the investigation was carried out by the P.S.I, attached to the Aslali Police Station. Thereafter the charge-sheet against the accused was sent up to the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Narol. In that case the accused came to be discharged under Section 25 lA(ii) of the Criminal Procedure Code by the Court in respect of an offence under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code on 24-1-67. Against that order, Revision Application No. 5 of 1967 was filed in the Court of the Sessions Judge at Narol, who set aside the order of discharge passed by the learned Magistrate and directed a further inquiry to be made in the matter. The case, however, was directed to be transferred to the Court...
The State of Gujarat Vs. Sanghar Ibrahim Ladha
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-09-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Guj148; 1971CriLJ949; (1971)0GLR503
1. The facts giving rise to this reference are very simple. During the course of investigation of Case No. 41 of 1969 of the Mandvi Police Station in respect of offences under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code, the P.S.I. Mandvi had gone to the village of Pipri on 17-5-69 and taken search of the house of Sanghar Ibrahim Ladha in the presence of panchas. In that search certain articles such as three aluminium wire bundles, one iron-board, one iron pointed bar, iron rod with nuts and bolts and small iron saw etc. were found. Since the accused could not give any satisfactory explanation as to how he came in possession of such articles, they came to be seized by making a panchanama in respect thereof. A complaint was filed by Mr. S.V. Tahilramani, the P.S.I. Mandvi, against the accused for an offence under Section 124 of the Bombay Police Act. 1951, in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Mandvi. On the date of hearing of the case viz., on 24-7-69, before record...
Hasmukhbhai Dhanjibhai Zaveri Vs. R. Parthasarthy
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1970
Reported in: (1971)12GLR128
P.D. Desai, J.1. This petition is directed against an order dated October 13, 1969, passed by the Municipal Commissioner of Baroda, who is the first respondent herein, under Section 258 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. The first petitioner is the owner of a piece or parcel of land bearing survey No. 563, Tika No. C7/5 situate in Sayajiganj area of the city of Baroda. By an agreement of sale dated December 8, 1968, the first petitioner agreed to sell the said land to one Kundanlal Chandulal Zaveri and others carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. Zaveri Brothers. Subsequently, by an agreement of sale dated March 31, 1969, the said Kundanlal Chandulal Zaveri and others, as Partners of M/s. Zaveri Brothers, and the first petitioner as a confirming party, agreed to sell the said land to petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 for and on behalf of petitioner No. 4.3. It appears that the petitioners desired to erect a building upon...
Madhuben Vs. Thakarda Lakhaji Sendhaji and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1970
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1013
Shah, J.1. The appellant in the case was original complainant in Criminal Case No. 1097 of 1967 before the learned trial Magistrate. The accusation made by the complainant against the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 was that they trespassed into the field and committed the offence punishable Under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate convicted the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and sentenced them to a term of imprisonment and fine. They preferred an appeal to the Sessions Court at Mehsana and it was numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 1968. The appeal was heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in that Court who held that the offence was not brought home to respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and therefore, acquitted each of them. This appeal is filed against the aforesaid order of acquittal by the original complainant.2. Mr. Karlekar who appears for the appellant-complainant raised two contentions before us. The first was that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who disposed ...
The State of Gujarat Vs. Shah Dineshchandra Mohanlal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Guj284; (1971)0GLR63
1. The defendants are the owners of S. No. 2 admeasuring 5 Bighas, 3 Visvasis, situate in the Sim of Village Kansa in Patan Taluka of Mehsana District. This land was acquired by the State Government on 24th December, 1947 for a public purpose. Its possession was not taken. In course of time the State Government felt that it did not require the land for the purpose for which it was originally acquired. Therefore, on 9th April, 1956 it issued a notification under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act withdrawing from the acquisition.2. After the land was acquired, proceedings for determining compensation payable for compulsory acquisition of the said land were instituted and the Land Acquisition Officer made an award in favour of the defendants for a sum of Rs. 651-4-10. Thereafter, at the instance of the defendants a reference was made to the District Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and the District Court enhanced the compensation to a much higher amount. Thereafter ...
Parshottam Motibhai Patel and anr. Vs. Ishwarbhai Lallubhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Guj252; (1971)0GLR280
D.P. Desai, J.1. The only question raised in this Appeal is the question of limitation and that question depends upon the admissibility of a document produced at Ex. 34/1 in the lower Court which is dated 27-10-1954 and which has been held by the Lower Court to be an unstamped promissory note and as such inadmissible in evidence. For the purpose of this appeal only a few facts may be stated as bearing upon this question.2. The present appellants who were plaintiffs before the lower Court filed Special Civil Suit No. 12 of 1961 from which this appeal arises, on March 7, 1961 for recovery of a total amount of Rs. 14,399-60p. As per the amended plaint, the case of the plaintiffs was that the defendant has borrowed a sum of Rs. 11,638 from the plaintiffs on 10-10-1954 i.e. the writing at Ex. 34/1, on the admissibility of which the question of limitation depends in the present case. According to the plaintiffs, demand of the dues under this oral loan were made after this writing but the def...
isha Valimahmad and anr. Vs. Haji Gulam Mohmad Haji Dada and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Guj208; (1971)0GLR201
Patel, J. 1. Civil Revision Application Nos. 392 of 1966 and 371 of 1966 have been referred to the Division Bench. The same question is involved in both the Revisions and, therefore, they are heard together. 2. Civil Revision Application No. 371 of 1966 came up for hearing before our learned brother Vakil J. Vakil J. held that there was no bar of res judicata. The suit was brought by the landlord for possession of leased premises on the ground that tenancy was terminated as the tenant had subject the premises before 1-1-1964. The Saurashtra Rent Control Act was in force at the time of subletting, however, the Bombay Rents. Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (Gujarat Extension Amendment Act, 1963, Act No. 57 of 1963) came into force on 1-1-1964. By the said Act, the Saurashtra Rent Control Act, 1951 (Saurashtra Act XXII of 1951) was repealed. The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 with amendments was applied to the Saurashtra area. The contractual...
Gulam Husen Jivabhai Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-03-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Guj259; (1970)11GLR960
Shelat, J. 1. The facts giving rise to this Letters Patent Appeal broadly stated are that in an inquiry held by the City Survey Officer in respect of the claim made by this appellant original plaintiff over the suit open site (called as 'Vada land') bearing Chalta No. 102 situated in the town of Dholka, in the District of Ahmedabad, an order dated 20th July 1951 was passed under Section 37 of the Land Revenue Code, declaring the land having vested in the Government, and the plaintiff having no claim of ownership thereon. Against that order the plaintiff appellant preferred an appeal to the Prant Officer who, by his order dated 9th December 1953 upheld the order passed by the City Survey Officer and dismissed the appeal. Against that order also, an appeal to the Collector. Ahmedabad, was filed and by an order dated 8th January 1954 it came to be dismissed. Against that order, a Revision Application No. BRT. 137/54 came to be filed before the Bombay Revenue Tribunal and by an order dated...
Natubhai Manilal Desai Vs. FakruddIn Kalumiya Syed and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-03-1970
Reported in: (1971)12GLR473
D.A. Desai, J.1. Natubhai Manilal Desai applicant in this revision application is the original complainant, He filed a complaint against opponents Nos. 1, and four others on 25th April 1968 alleging that opponent No. 1 and four others committed criminal trespass in his house on 11th February 1968 and present opponent No. 1 who was original accused No, 5 assaulted him or used criminal force against him. The applicant was at the relevant time the Chairman of Karmabad Nutan Vasahat Co-operative Society Limited. Opponent No. 1 was the District Registrar of Cooperative Societies in charge of Banaskantha District at Palanpur. He made an order under Section 83 of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act authorising the auditor who was original accused No. 2 to seize the books of accounts of the said society from the complainant. Pursuant to this order, original accused No. 1 the auditor, original accused No. 2 Mahendr-kumar Joshi and two peons of the department along with the present opponent N...
Motilal Sankalchand JaIn Vs. the Municipal Corporation of the City of ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-03-1970
Reported in: (1971)12GLR640
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The plaintiff was a Sanitary Inspector employed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation constituted under the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act 1949. He was removed from service by the order of the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation on 5th June 1957. The plaintiff appealed to the Standing Committee against the order of the Municipal Commissioner on 26th June 1957. The Standing Committee dismissed the plaintiff's appeal by its resolution dated 6th January 1958. Thereafter the plaintiff served upon the Municipal Corporation statutory notice under Section 487 of the said Act on 3rd February 1958 and filed the present suit on 17th March 1958 for declaration that the order of removal made by the second defendant the Commissioner-and the appellate order made by the Standing Committee were illegal and ultra vires and also for decree for Rs. 2245-50 p. for arrears of salary at the rate of Rs. 165/- per month.2. The defendants resisted the suit on the ground of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »