Gujarat Court September 1972 Judgments
Nanikaram Gellaram Vs. Drupadiben
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-28-1972
Reported in: AIR1974Guj111; (1973)GLR620
1. This petition involves a simple question of law as regards the interpretation of clause (b) (ii) of sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 1955 (Act No. 25 of 1955) thereinafter referred to as the Act). The original petition namely, H.M.P. No. 5 of 1965 was filed under sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act for annulment of the marriage on the ground covered by clause (d), namely that the respondent was at the time of the marriage pregnant by some person other than the petitioner. The petitioner's case was that his marriage with the respondent wife was solemnized, according to Hindu religious rites on June 1, 1964 at Kubernagar in Ahmedabad. At that date, he did not know that the respondent was pregnant. He came to know about it only in the month of October 1964. The respondent-wife delivered a child on October 25, 1964. The respondent-wife is now staying with her parents at Ankleshwar. It was on this allegation that the petition was filed on June 14, 1965. The r...
Tag this Judgment!Shrinivas Vaman Karve and anr. Vs. Chandanben Jayantilal Dalal and ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-28-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj182; (1973)0GLR257
ORDER1. One of the questions raised in this revisional application by the petitioners of whom petitioner No. 1 is the tenant and No. 2 is his son relates to the interpretation of clause (1) of Section 13(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act'). Admittedly, the suit premises are held by petitioner No. 1, the father as tenant of the opposite-parties plaintiffs. They filed suit for possession from which present proceeding arises, claiming eviction of the tenant on several grounds and the only ground which now survives for consideration is the ground falling under Section 13(1)(1) of the Act. Of course, some other contentions were also raised on behalf of the petitioners. but they are also based upon the application of clause (1) to the facts of this case. For this purpose, therefore the facts of this case most of which are December 10, 1963, a house consisting of two separate Galas, hereafter to be referred to as weste...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Kanchanguari Chhagnalal Vs. Chandulal Virjibhai Tank
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-26-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj275; (1973)GLR532
1. This is a Hindu wife's appeal directed against the decision of the learned District Judge. Rajkot. give on July 31, 1971 in Civil Appeal No. 59 of 1970, thereby reversing the decree of dismissal of the present respondent's Hindu Marriage Petitioner No. 50 of 1968 which was filed on September 27, 1968 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 1955 (Act No. 25 of 1955) for restitution of conjugal rights. The learned trial Judge had dismissed the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner husband who is the respondent herein had failed to prove the averment in the petitioner. namely. that the wife had withdrawn from the society of her husband without reasonable excuse. He also found that the respondent-wife had proved that she had been treated by the petitioner husband with cruelty. Having regard to these findings. the learned trial Judge dismissed the petition. In reaching his conclusion,. the learned Judge had considered the oral as well as the documentary evidence on record. In h...
Tag this Judgment!Dave Ramshankar Jivatram Vs. Bai Kailasgauri
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-26-1972
Reported in: AIR1974Guj69
1. This is origional defendant's second appeal directed against the decision of the learned Assistant Judge Baroda given on September 26 .1967 . in Regular Civil Appeal No 162 of 1965 . thereby affirming the decision given in decree of specific performance of an immovable property situated in the city of Baroda . which the appeallant defendant has earlier purchased and then agreed to reconvey the same within a period of seven years from the date of the agreement of reconveyanance . Exhibit 27 . The Courts below have rejected the defence of the appeallant -defendant that the decree of specific performance will give the plaintiff - respondant an unfair advantage over the defendant appellant which he did not forsee . The Courts have thus taken the view that the case does not fall under clause (a) or clause (b) of sub - sec (2)n of section 20 of the specific Relief Act . 1963 (Act No 47 of 1963 ) hereinafter reffered to as the Act ) The defence contention does not appear to have been dealt...
Tag this Judgment!Badrudd1n Mohmad Ali Vohra Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-25-1972
Reported in: (1973)14GLR605
C.V. Rane, J.1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, by this Reference recommends that the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mehsana, on the complaint filed by one Badruddin Mohmad All Vohra, on 30-3-1972, may be set aside and he may be directed to proceed with the complaint according to law.2. According to the above complaint, three accused persons illegally entered the compound of the premises in possession of the complainant and committed mischief by removing iron sheets fixed in the ground. The accused had committed the above offences of criminal trespass and mischief on 9-5-1971 at about 9 a. m. in the morning. Even though, the wife of the complainant asked them not to remove the iron sheets from the compound, they continued their illegal acts.. The complainant on being informed went to the place and protested against the action of the accused but, they did not listen to him. The complainant, therefore, lodged a complaint at the police statio...
Tag this Judgment!Vohra Bai Khatiia Isabhai and ors. Vs. Vohra Karimbhai Issabhai and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-22-1972
Reported in: AIR1974Guj4; (1973)GLR679
1. The appellants are the three daughters of a Sunni Hanafi Bohra named Issa. Hasan who died on 12th January 1954 in the town of Muli which formed -part of the former State of Saurashtra at that time and where the deceased had settled. The deceased had left behind him several agricultural pieces of lands, a residential house and certain other property described in Schedule 'A' to the plaint, which was instituted on April 14. 1965. in the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division). Muli and the suit was registered as Regular Civil Suit No. 40 of 1965. The plaintiffs claim that they are the daughters of deceased Bohra Issa and are governed by the Hanafi School of Mahomedan Law and are thus entitled collectively to a share as sharers according to Mahomedan Law. The plaintiffs claim that after the demise of their father defendant No. 1 Vohra Karimbhai step-brother of the plaintiffs was managing the estate of the deceased. They claimed Partition of the suit properties and separate possessio...
Tag this Judgment!Mansukhlal Kapurchand Sanghavi and anr. Vs. Shushilaben Durlabhji Vira ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-22-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Guj278; (1973)0GLR422
Bhagwati, C.J.1. These Letters Patent Appellant involve an interesting question of law relating to the scope of an appeal preferred under clause 15 of the Letter Patent against a decision given by the Single Judge of the High Court in Second Appeal. The question is, whether an appellant in such a Letter Patent Appeal is entitle to raise a new contention which has not been taken by him before the learned Judge hearing the Second Appeal or he is limited only to the contentions advances by him at the hearing forth Section appeal. The question is of the some importance and it is necessary to examine it closely because there are conflicting decision of this Court and the conflict has to be resolved. The facts giving the rise to these Letter Patent Appeals are similar in material particulars and it would therefore, be sufficient if we state the facts of one on of them, namely, Letter Patent Appeal No. 58 of 1968.2. The plaintiff in Letter Patent Appeal No. 58 of 1968 filed a suit against the...
Tag this Judgment!Josh I Mulshanker Somnath Vs. Gujarat Ayurved University and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-22-1972
Reported in: (1973)14GLR529
P.N. Bhagwati, C.J.1. The petitioner is an Assistant Professor in the Sarkari Akhandanand Ayurvedic Mahavidyalaya, Ahmedabad, which is a college affiliated to the Gujarat Ayurved University, which is the first respondent before us. The second respondent is the Vice-Chancellor and the third respondent is the Registrar of the first respondent University. The first respondent University is constituted under the Gujarat Ayurved University Act, 1965. Section 14 of the Gujarat Ayurved University Act provides inter alia that the Senate shall be one of the authorities of the first respondent University. The constitution of the Senate is provided in Section 15 of the Gujarat Ayurved University Act, 1965. The members of the Senate consists of two classes, namely, Class I and Class II. 'Class I consists of ex-officio members while Class II consists of ordinary members. There are several categories of ordinary members. One category consists of 'five members to be elected by the teachers of affilia...
Tag this Judgment!Vanand Savji Tapu Vs. Bai Jaikunver Durlabhji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-21-1972
Reported in: (1973)14GLR410
P.N. Bhagwati, C.J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal raises an interesting question of law as to the effect of repeal of Saurashtra Rent Control Act, 1951, (hereinafter referred to as the Saurashtra Rent Act) on a suit filed by a landlord against a tenant in respect of premises exempt from the applicability of the Saurashtra Rent Act by reason of Section 4(2) of that Act. The facts giving rise to the appeal are few and may be briefly stated as follows.2. The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant to recover possession of certain premises let to the defendant. The premises were situate in Bagasara which was formerly part of Saurashtra. The case of the plaintiff was that the premises were new premises erected and let for the first time after 1st January 1951 and, therefore, by reason of the exemption contained in Section 4(2), the Saurashtra Rent Act had no application to the premises and the plaintiff was entitled to recover possession of the premises under the ordinary law of landlor...
Tag this Judgment!Mangalbhai Fulabhai Nai and anr. Vs. Parsottam Garbadbhai Parmar and a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Sep-20-1972
Reported in: AIR1974Guj11; (1973)GLR292
Divan, J.1. Both these Special Civil Applications have been referred to a Division Bench. Special Civil Application No. 1393/1967 has been referred by M. P, Thakkar J. and Special Civil Application No. 1621/1970 has been referred by S. H. Sheth J. Both these Special Civil Applications raise a common question of law. viz.. Whether the heirs of a certified landlord to whom the Certificate has been issued under Seq. 88-C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) car file or continue proceedings under Section 32T of the Act for the purpose of obtaining Possession from the tenant. On February 4. 1971. M. P.2. Before taking up the discussion regarding the legal Point arising in the case. it will be appropriate to refer to the facts of each Special Civil Application. In Special Civil Application No. 1393 of 1967, the original petitioner in this High Court was one Mangalbhai Fulabhai, whose father Fulabbai Ambaidas was the original landlord and...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »