Gujarat Court December 1971 Judgments
Shivlal Mafatal and ors. Vs. Mafatlal Ambaram
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-22-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj209
ORDER1. This is a revision petition filed by the original plaintiffs against the opponent-defendant (tenant) under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (which will be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act:), against the judgment and decree passed by the appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, in Civil Appeal No.132 of 1964, dismissing that appeal with costs and confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial judge of the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, in Civil Suit No.1728 of 1957.2. Both the courts below have refused to pass a decree for eviction on the ground that the opponent-tenant having raised a dispute regarding the standard rent within one month, from the date of the receipt of the notice, Ex.41 given by the landlords for determining the tenancy and calling upon him to pay the arrears of rent, for a period over six months. According to the two Courts below, there having been raised such a dispute regarding...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Rajasthan Vs. Rustamji Savkasha
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-21-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj179
1. This is an appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan, original decree-holder, against the respondent (judgment-debtor) under Section 47 of the Civil P. C. (which will be hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Godhra, dated 24.12.1970, dismissing Special Darkhast No. 9 of 1967, filed by the appellant, to execute a money-decree obtained by it against the respondent in Special Civil Suit No. 6 of 1953, of the District Court of Alwar in Rajasthan. The Darkhast has been dismissed on the ground that it has been time-barred.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as under:The date of the decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 6 of 1953, by the District Court, Alwar, Rajasthan, is 13.12.1955. On 13.12.1956, the decree-holder filed Darkhast No. 34 of 1958 in the District Court at Alwar. On 14.7.1959, it was disposed of as there was no property of the judgment - debtor within the territorial jurisdiction ...
Tag this Judgment!Satya Vijay Patel Hindu Dharamshala Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-t ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR683(Guj)
P.N. Bhagwati, C.J.1. The assessee are the trustees of a trust called Shri Satya Vijay Patel Hindu Dharamshala Trust. The trust was created by a declaration of trust, dated 27th April, 1952, executed by one Mavji Jairam Patel and his wife. Bai Santokbai (hereinafter referred to as 'the settlors'). By the declaration of trust the settlors settled on trust a certain immovable property known as Shri Satya Vijay Patel Hindu Dharamshala and the objects for which the trust property was to be held were set out as follows in clauses 2, 6, 7 and 8 of the declaration of trust : '2. The object of the trust is - to use the trust property as a 'dharamshala' for Hindus and all Hindus shall have a right to use it as such on such terms and conditions as may be decided upon from time to time by the trustees. 6. After defraying all necessary expenses incurred in the realisation of the income of the subject-matter of trust and incurred in the maintenance of the trust property at the end of each Hindu ye...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Naranbhai Jinabhai Vs. Patel Gopaldas Venidas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-16-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj229
ORDER1. This is a revision petition filed by the original plaintiff under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dholka, dated 29th September, 1971, below application, Ex. 170, in Regular Civil Suit No.125 of 1969.2. This revision petition raises many interesting questions.3. The facts giving rise to this revision petition, briefly stated, are as under:--The petitioner filed Civil Suit No.125 of 1969 against the defendant (opponent) in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Dholka. That suit was for obtaining permanent injunction restraining the opponent from interfering with possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of land situate in village Ambaliara, Taluka Dholka, bearing Block No.508, admeasuring 4 acres 8 gunthas. According to the petitioner, that field was agreed to be purchased by him from Shantaben Mohanbhai and Laxmiben Mohanlal. That Banakhat was executed on 28th March, 1969, and the...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Chaturbhai Nanabhai Vs. Patel Mohanbhai Nanabhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj217
1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 47 of the Civil P.C. against the order passed by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division. Nadiad, in Special Darkhast No. 54 of 1968, dated 26th February, 1970.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as under:This Darkhast is filed by respondent No. 1, Patel Mohanbhai Nanabhai (original defendant No. 1) against the appellant-plaintiff for execution of the decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 22 of 1951 - a partition suit between two brothers - on 15-3-1954. Respondent No. 2 (original defendant No. 2) was an alienee. We are not concerned with him in the present proceedings. Respondent No. 1 sought to recover Rs. 2,002/- plus the costs of the Darkhast, Rs. 7.88 plus the interest amount of Rs. 2,274.88 paise from the appellant. Under clause 6 of the decree, the appellant had undertaken an obligation to pay Rs. 1,001/- on the first occasion of the marriage or respondent No. 1's son or daughter. Rs. 1,0...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Ganda and ors. Vs. Driver Garasiya Keshubhai Shivubha and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj286; (1972)0GLR744
ORDER1. The respondents in all the four applications are the same. Each of these four petitioners had filed applications under the provisions of S.110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter claiming amounts as and by way of compensation on account of the injury received by him or her in the course of an accident or by the deceased Bai Monghi Kala. The accident took place on the road from Surendranagar to Rajkot near Morvi Bridge. Respondent No.1 in each of these petitioners was the driver of the truck which was involved in the accident; respondent No.2 is the owner of the truck and respondent No.3 is the Insurance Company with whom the appropriate insurance was taken out by the owner. Different amount were claimed in each of these petitions and ultimately a compromise was entered into and regular compromise pursises were filed in each of the four applications before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Surendranagar. The learned district Judge, as such Tribunal, recorded the co...
Tag this Judgment!Doshi Kantilal Kanaiyalal and anr. Vs. Modiya Chandulal Chhotalal Ranc ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-12-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Guj80
ORDER1. At the outset of the hearing of the matter, Mr. V. J. Desai, appearing for the petitioners (judgment debtors Nos. 1 and 2). stated that no second appeal lay and only revision lay, as decided by a Division Bench of this court in Gandhi Gopaldas Gordhandas v. Bai Lalitabi Marghabhi. : AIR1971Guj270 and, therefore, request that leave the granted to covert this covert this second appeal into a Civil Revision Application and the request has been granted. The appellant will, therefore, be referred to as 'the petitioners' and the respondents will be referred to as 'the petitioners' hereafter.2. The facts leading rise to this revision petition briefly stated are as under:3. Opponent NO. 1 filed Civil Suit No. 268 of 1969 against the present petitioners for recovery of arrears of rent to the extent of Rs. 642/-. Agreed amount of rent was Rs. 22/- per month. Opponent No. 2 was joined as a party in that suit on the basis that he was a surety. In that suit, possession in of the leased prop...
Tag this Judgment!Amratlal Muljibhai Thakkar and anr. Vs. Amabalal Ranchhodbhai Thakkar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-08-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj240; (1972)GLR756
ORDER1. The petitioner herein are the owners of S. No. 756, admeasuring 6 acres, situated at Kotambi village of Waghodia Taluka of Baroda District. The two petitioners are related in the sense that the second petitioner is the widow of the deceased cousin of the first petitioner and the S. No.. stands jointly in the name of the two petitioners. The second petitioner was widow on April 1, 1957. The second petitioner obtained an exemption certificate under S. 88-C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act.) the respondent herein was an ordinary tenant of the petitioners in respect of this land. The respondent did not pay rent regularly and used to commit defaults in payment of rent. For the years 196-61, 1961-62 and 1962-63, the respondent committed three defaults in payment of rent. After serving the respondent with due notice for each default a final notice terminating the tenancy was given on July 6, 1963. Thereafter the petitioners filed a s...
Tag this Judgment!Farsubhai Altaphai Saiyed and ors. Vs. Dullabhabhai Bhagabhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj244; (1972)0GLR674
ORDER1. The short question that arises for determination in this Revision Application is whether the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain an action instituted by a plaintiff who has not suffered bodily injury as a result of an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle but whose property is damaged as a result of the accident. The fact giving rise to the Revision Application are few and may be briefly stated as follows.2. The plaintiff is the owner of a Scooter bearing No. M.R.A. 1305. On 26th April, 1967 the Scooter was being driver by a friend of the plaintiff named Kevalbhai Bhagwandas Parmar and there was also one other person sitting behind Kevalbhai Bhagwandas Parmar on the pinion of the Scooter. Whilst the scooter was being driven Kevalbhai Bhagwandas Parmar, one motor truck bearing No. G.T.A.527 collided with it and considerable damage was caused to the scooter as a result of the accident. Kevalbhai Bhagwandas Parmar and the person sitting behind him also received bo...
Tag this Judgment!Kodarbhai Becharbhai Patel Vs. Mohanbhai Motibhai Patel and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-01-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Guj247
ORDER1. The petitioner herein was a Sarpanch who was elected to that post in Dungarwada village Panchayat. Dungarwada is situated in Modasa Taluka of Sabarkantha District. He was elected as Sarpanch in 1966. The petitioner was also elected as the Sarpanch in 1962 and had acted in that capacity from 1962 to 1966. From 1966 onwards, the petitioner has been acting as a Sarpanch after being elected to the said post as per the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and the Rules made thereunder. Originally the period of the tenure of the Sarpanch was four years but by a subsequent amendment of the Act, the period has been extended to rive years. Respondent No.1 is a resident of Dungerwara village and respondent No.2 is the Development Commissioner, Gujarat State, functioning under the provisions of the Act. Dhudabhai Narsinhbhai and Hirabhai joitabhai, both residing at Dungerwada, had filed an application against the petitioner complaining of certain ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›