Gujarat Court October 1971 Judgments
Trustees of Religious Public Trust of Salam Jamadar's Mosque and Ors. ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj162
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Assistant Judge. Panchmahals at Godhra setting aside the judgment and decree for eviction passed by the learned trial Judge and remanding the suit to him under Section 151, Civil Procedure Code, with a direction that he should raise issues and re-number them and send the same to the Mamlatdar for decision and in the meanwhile to stay the suit, under Section 85-A of the Tenancy Act.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in a nut-shell are as under:--3. The trustees of a religious public trust of Salam Jamadar's Mosque filed a suit against the present respondent Vaghri Sana Ratna to recover possession of the trust property which was in his possession as a tenant. The learned Civil Judge. Senior Division, Godhra passed a decree for eviction against the tenant. In an appeal preferred in the District Court. Panchmahals at Godhra, the learned Assistant Judge who heard the appeal was of the view that the question whether the pres...
Tag this Judgment!Baburao Vithal Survade Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-26-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1574
C.V. Rane, J.1. This is an appeal to challenge the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned 2nd Extra Additional Sessions Judge. Baroda, in Sessions Case No. 42/71 on 15th May 1971. The learned Judge has convicted the accused-appellant of an offence punishable under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer R. I. for seven years. The prosecution story in the above case, was in brief, as under:2. The houses of the accused and the deceased Nivrutirao are situated near each other at Baroda. On the previous day of the incident i.e. on 7-11-1970 the wife of the accused had assaulted the wife of Nivrutirao, Nivrutirao returned home on that day at about 1 a. m. On the next day in the morning when he sot up. his wife Narmada was lying in a bed due to the injuries caused to her by the wife of the accused. In the morning he went to the house of the accused and told him that, his wife and daughter had beaten his wife Narmada on the previous day. After t...
Tag this Judgment!Hiragar Dayager and anr. Vs. Ratanlal Chunilala and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-26-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Guj15
Bhagwati, C.J.1. This Letter Patent Appeal raises a short but very interesting question of law relating to the maintainability and appeal against an order made by a Single Judge of the High Court in appeal against a decision of the District court under Section 72 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. It is not necessary for the purpose of determination of the is question to state the facts giving rise to this Letter Patent Appeal in detail but it would be sufficient if we briefly set to a few of the relevant facts, as that would help to understand how the question arises of consideration. There is treat known as Dholeshwar Madhev Trust which consists inter alia of the temple situate in Cambay and it was registered as a public trust by the Assistant Charity commissioner on 10th November 1953 on an application on the made by one Motigar Lalgar Gosai, Motigar Lalgar Gosai having die don 21st October, 1958, the appellants who are his heirs filed a change report under Section 22 sub-section...
Tag this Judgment!Parasram Manjimal and ors. Vs. the Kalol Municipality, Kalol
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj54; (1972)0GLR497
B.K. Mehta, J.1. These two petitions under Arts, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are directed against the notices issued by the respondent-Municipality to the respective petitioners to open and remove the unauthorised construction of cabins and structures on the plots of a public street in the town of Kalol. The short facts leading to these petitions are as under:2. In Special Civil Application No.498 of 1970, there is a piece of land near Vishnu Talkies in Kalol town. The said piece of land is a part of the public street and as such vested in the respondent-Municipality. The petitioners were in possession of the said piece of land as lessees. They were said to be in possession since more than 15 years and are running the business in the cabins which they had put up on the said land since inception of the tenancy. The petitioners are monthly tenants and paying rent of the premises to the respondent-Municipality. It appears that various pieces of public street lands were leased...
Tag this Judgment!Jankhan Kalukhan and ors. Vs. the State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-06-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj103; (1972)GLR577
B.K. Mehta, J.1. In this petition under Arts 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who are the ex-Taluqdars of the villages Rani and Ranod in District Mehsana have challenged the right of the State Government to file an appeal under Section 32-P(9) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, as well the order made by the opponent No. 2 herein, who is a Special Secretary in Revenue Department of the Government of Gujarat, dated 2nd November, 1970 which is Ex. L to the petition passed in Appeal No. 449 of 1966 and Appeal No. 2 of 1968 preferred by the tenants of the petitioners-Taluqdars, remanding the matters involved in the Appeals to the Mamlatdar to determine against whether the appellants in the said appeals were permanent tenants of the petitioners-Taluqdars or not. Shortly stated, the facts leading to this petition are as under:-On enactment of the Bombay Tauqdari Tenure Abolition Act of 1949, which came in force from 15th August, 1950, the tenure o...
Tag this Judgment!C.B. Pandey Vs. Employees' State Insurance Corporation and Ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-05-1971
Reported in: (1973)IILLJ585Guj
ORDER1. This petition is directed against an order dismissing the petitioner from the service of the first respondent, Employees' State Insurance Corporation, by an order dated 26th August, 1968. The petitioner joined service with the first respondent on 14th October, 1958 as a record sorter and in course of time came to be promoted as clerk in March, 1960, as cashier in May, 1964 and as upper division clerk in December, 1965 and at the relevant time, that is on 19th June, 1967, he was serving as upper division clerk and was entrusted with the work of processing permanent disablement claims. On 19-6-67 the petitioner is alleged to have demanded a bribe from one Becharbhai Kohyabhai for taking action in favour of him for settlement of his permanent disablement benefit claim. On that day as one Shri Gulab Singh, regular cashier, was on leave the petitioner while making payment demanded and accepted from Becharbhai Kohyabhai an amount of Rs. 25 from his temporary disablement benefit claim...
Tag this Judgment!Hasmukhlal N. Vakilna Vs. Bhairavnathsingh and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-05-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ560; (1972)GLR811
T.U. Mehta, J.1. The question which is raised by this revision application is whether tender of pardon to an accomplice under Section 337 of the Criminal Procedure Code can be granted for the offences not covered by any of the three categories contemplated by that section, in cases, where during the course of the same transaction, some offences, which are covered by Section 337 of the Criminal Procedure Code, are committed along with some other offences, which are not so covered. The question arises to be considered in the background of the following facts.2. Opponent No. 1 Bhairav Nath Singh, is the Income-tax officer serving at Surat. He has filed a criminal com-plaint against the opponents Nos. 2, 3 and 4 as well as the present petitioner in the Court of J. M. F. C. at Surat for the offences under Sections 120B. 182, 193, 196, 201, 380, 466, 471, 109. 116 and 511 of Indian Penal Code on the allegation that all the accused persons including the present petitioner have conspired to mi...
Tag this Judgment!Naiabhai Ranchhod and anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-04-1971
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1605
ORDERT.U. Mehta, J.1. This is a reference made by the Sessions Judge. Rajkot in Cri. Revn. Application No. 39/71 of his file wherein he has recommended that the order made by the Court of J. M. F. C. Rajkot in Criminal Case No. 483/70 of his file compelling the accused-petitioner to get himself medically examined in order to determine the age of the defect in the vision of one of his eves should be set aside. The learned Sessions Judge is of the opinion that the Criminal Procedure Code contains no provisions under which an accused person can be ordered to submit to medical examination which is likely to enable the prosecution to obtain incriminating evidence against him.2. It is an admitted position that the petitioner No. 1, Naiabhai Ranchhod. who is the accused No. 1 before the learned Magistrate, is prosecuted for the offence under Section 419 read with Section 34. I. P.C. on the allegation that with a view to obtain a driving licence from the Regional Transport Office, he requested...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Lohana Dhirajlal Mohanlal
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-01-1971
Reported in: 1973CriLJ82; (1972)GLR826
ORDERT.U. Mehta, J.1. The opponent in this revision application, one Lohana Dhirajlal Mohanlal. was sought to be prosecuted for the offence under Sections 66(1)(b) and 67(1)(c) of the Bombay Prohibition Act in Criminal Case No. 1285 of 1971 of the Court of J.M.F.C. Mongrol-Keshod at Keshod. The learned Magistrate found from the Police papers that along with the articles which were seized by the Police from the accused, there was one permit, which authorised the possession of one bottle of denatured spirit for domestic purpose. The spirit which was seized by the Police from the accused, was less than one bottle in quantity. In view of this, the learned Magistrate passed an order under Section 249 of the Criminal Procedure Code stopping further proceedings of the case and 'releasing the accused.' The relevant portion of the order of the learned Magistrate is as under:In view of above position, no offence seems to have been committed by the accused and the Police ought not to have submitt...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›