Gujarat Court January 1973 Judgments
Babubhai Ratanchand and ors. Vs. Motilal Jesingbhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Guj152; (1973)GLR915
ORDER1. The petitioners herein are the original defendants 1 to 4 and respondents Nos. 1/1 to 1/7 are the heirs and legal representatives of the original plaintiff Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 are the original defendants Nos. 5 and 6 . The plaintiff, who was the landlord, had filed a suit against the petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in the Court of Small Causes, Ahmedabad, praying for a decree for eviction. The learned judge in the trial Court decided the matter on August 16, 1966 and passed a decree for eviction and directed that the defendants should vacate the suit premises on or before December 31, 1966. Against this judgment and decree of the trial Court, there was an appeal which was to be disposed of by a Bench of two judges of the Court of Small Causes and during the pendency of that appeal, the plaintiff died on or about February 9, 1969. After the death of the original plaintiff, his advocate filed a purshis in the Court on February 24, 1969 intimating about the death. A ...
Tag this Judgment!Lalji Kunverji Vs. Bhatia Dungershi Jivandas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-30-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Guj42; (1974)0GLR128
1. This appeal arises out of execution application No. 37/69 filed by the appellant in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division at Anjar Kutch district. The appellant-decree holder has obtained the decree, which is sought to be executed, in civil suit No.95/61 of that Court, on 5th December.1962. That decree was for possession and recovery of arrears of rent. It appears that the suit property, about which the decree is passed, was mortgaged with the appellant decree holder by Dungarshi Jivandas, the father of the judgment -debtors. It was a mortgage with possession. The mortgagor, therefore, executed a rent note in favour of the decree holder. It was on the basis of this rent note that the above referred civil suit No. 95/71 was filed by the decree holder. That suit was filed against the present respondents in their capacity as the legal representatives of Dungarshi. It is an admitted fact that at the time when the said suit was instituted on 16-10-1961,Dunparshi had already died, and...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmanbhai Hirajibhai Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-29-1973
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1189; (1974)15GLR183
J.M. Seth, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellant who has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 18(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act. 1947 (which will be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and sentenced to suffer one month's rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 400/- and in de fault of payment of line to undergo one-month's further vigorous imprisonment, by the learned City Magistrate, 4th Court, Ahmedabad, in Summary Case No. 1658 of 1970.2. The prosecution case is that Manubhai Dharamsinhbhai. the complainant, is a tenant of Laxmanbhai Hirajibhai (appellant) from 1st January, 1969, ' and a room and a Verandah were given to him on lease. The appellant took Rs. 300/- from him (complainant-tenant) as a landlord, by way of deposit. That the rent fixed for the premises was Rs. 25/- per month. As the aforesaid offence was committed by the appellant, he lodged complaint in the Court with regard to that offence on 17th Decembe...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Ganga Wd/O. Khoda Chhagan and ors. Vs. Bai Kamla Daughter of Manga ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-1973
Reported in: (1974)15GLR345
S.H. Sheth, J.1. Khodabhai Chhaganbhai the father of petitioners Nos. 2 to 8 and husband of petitioner No. 1 was the' tenant in respect of S. Nos. 178/2, 179 and 180 of village Tarsali in Padra Taluka of Baroda district. S. No. 178/2 has been admeasuring 7 Gunthas, S. No. 179 has been admeasuring 2 acres and 34 Gunthas and S. No. 180 has been admeasuring 34 Gunthas. They belonged to one Bai Jadav widow of Somabhai Punjabhai. Since Bai Jadav was a widow statutory purchase of these lands under Section 32 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Tenancy Act for the sake of brevity) was postponed. Bai Jadav died on 14th February 1961. She had one son Mangaldas who had predeceased her. She was survived by three daughters who are the respondents Nos. 1,2 and 3 to this petition. On 6th August 1956, Bai Jadav executed a will by which she bequeathed these lands upon respondent No. 4 Ashokkumar who is the son of one of her daughters-Savita, responden...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Dhanji Mavji and ors. Vs. Gadhvi Govind Jiva and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1973
Reported in: 1974CriLJ241; (1974)GLR136
ORDERJ.M. Sheth, J.1. This is a revision petition filed by the original accused against the order passed by the learned judicial Magistrate. First Class. Gandal, in Criminal Case No. 410 of 1972 dated 27th July. 1972, regarding issue of summons against them for offences punishable under Sections 323. 504 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code.2. The grievance made by the petitioners is that the learned Magistrate had no power or jurisdiction to issue such process till the complainant, who had taken out such a proceeding against them, has filed the list of the prosecution witnesses. That having been not done, this order regarding issue of process is invalid and bad in law. The petitioners had filed Criminal Revision Application No. 17 of 1972 in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot District, Gondal, praying for revising the aforesaid order. That application has been dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. The petitioners have, therefore, moved this Court.3. The learned...
Tag this Judgment!Bhogilal Harilal Dave Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-22-1973
Reported in: 1974CriLJ178; (1974)GLR203
J.M. Sheth, J.1. This appeal is filed by the appellant who has been convicted of an offence punishable, under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer three months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rupees 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo one month's simple imprisonment, by the learned City Magistrate, 7th Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case No, 918 of 1970. Review application has been filed for enhancement of the sentence.2. The appellant was charged in that, he in the month of August, 1968, printed for sale in the name of Prakash Vardhan, a book bearing the title 'EK SANSKARI GHARNI YUVTINl KHAN-Gl DIARY' which is an obscene book. In that, it contained the following passages quoted in the sheet attached, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Mr. G. A. Mehta, appearing for the appellant, has contended that the appellant was charged for the aforesaid offence having been committed sometime ...
Tag this Judgment!Hari Chaku Vs. Mamlatdar Lalpur and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-1973
Reported in: AIR1973Guj233; (1974)GLR64
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner who is a registered voter in the village Khad--Khambhalia challenges in this petitioner the notification issued on September Gujarat Panchayat Act. 1961. hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' by the competent authority dividing this Gram into three election wards and district three seats to each ward. The Khad--Khambhalia Gram Panchayat originally consisted of four village-- Khad--Khambhalia. Nava Dhunia Khatia and Rakka. From the inception of the Group Gram Panchayat in 1952. election was always uncontested and its 11 seats at that time had been divided as under: Khad--Khambhalia --6 Khatia -- 2 Nava Dhunia --1 Rakka --2.Thus, as against 6 seats for Khad--Khambhalia. Nava Dhunia had only one seat for all these 18 to 20 years,. The old Gram Panchayat had passed unanimous resolution to have separate Panchayat for all the four villages. However, the State Government under Section 9 of the Act gave separate Panchayat by constituting only Khatia Rakka as new ...
Tag this Judgment!Nandalal Khodidas Barot Vs. V.B. Buch and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-17-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Guj45; (1973)GLR903
Divan, J.1. The petitioner herein has challenged certain orders passed by the Collector of Mehsana in connection with matters arising before him under the provisions of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and has also challenged the action of the second respondent, the President of Kalol Municipality, in connection with certain meetings held on the requisition by some of the members of that Municipality. The Petitioner is appearing in person. He is an elected councillor of this municipality. At the time of the presentation of the petition, he was the Chairman of the Legal Committee of Kalol Municipality. Respondent No. 2 is the President of the Municipality and respondent No. 3 is the Acting Chief Officer of the Kalol Municipality, who was appointed to that post under the circumstances set out in the petition. Respondent No. 1 is the Collector of Mehsana. Respondent No. 4 is the Government of Gujarat. Respondent No. 5 is the former Chief Officer of...
Tag this Judgment!Nandlal Khodidas Barot Vs. V.B. Buch, Collector and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-17-1973
Reported in: (1973)14GLR903
B.J. Divan, J.1. The petitioner herein has challenged certain orders passed by the Collector of Mehsana in connection with matters arising before him under the provisions of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and has also challenged the action of the second respondent, the President of Kalol Municipality, in connection with certain meetings held on the requisition by some of the members of that Municipality. The petitioner is appearing in person. He is an elected councillor of this municipality. At the time of the presentation of the petition, he was the Chairman of the Legal Committee of Kalol Municipality. Respondent No. 2 is the President of the Municipality and respondent No. 3 is the Acting Chief Officer of the Kalol Municipality, who was appointed to that post under the circumstances set out in the petition. Respondent No. 1 is the Collector of Mehsana. Respondent No. 4 is the Government of Gujarat. Respondent No. 5 is the former Chief Offic...
Tag this Judgment!K.S. Nair Vs. Oil Natural Gas Commission ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-11-1973
Reported in: (1974)15GLR7
J.B. Mehta, J.1. In the first petition the petitioner temporary Chief Store Keeper challenges the validity of the action of the Respondent-Oil Natural Gas Commission, hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission' re-fixing the seniority of the petitioner and respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in the cadre of chief store-keepers so as to treat these backward class respondents as senior. In the second petition, the petitioner has given a withdrawal Purshis so far as respondents Nos. 5 to 11 are concerned and has now confined his attack only so far as Respondent No. 4 Gyansing is concerned and the petitioner has challenged action of the Commission in calling respondent No. 4 at the interview which was to be held on February 8, 1972, by the Departmental Promotion Committee for the post of Executive Engineer (Production) on the footing that here also this backward class Respondent No. 4 was senior to the petitioner temporary Assistant Engineer, Production. In the third petition also the petitioner havi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›