Gujarat Court May 1974 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 Punjabhai Vinchiya Vs. the Gujarat State Road Transport Corpor ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Guj94; (1975)GLR274
ORDER1. The claimant who had met with a Motor accident had filed a claim of compensation before the Tribunal of Rs. 30,000/- and as he had no means to enable him to pay the requisite court-fee amount of Rs.950/- he had prayed for instituting the proceeding as pauper under Order 33, Rule 1. The learned District Judge who was acting as a Claims Tribunal having dismissed this application on the sole ground that the claimant had two cows and one buffalow worth Rs. 1,400/- from which he could raise the necessary funds for the purpose of paving the aforesaid court-fee amount, the claimant has filed this revision application.2. Under Order 33, Rule 1 Explanation 'a person is a 'pauper' when he is not possessed of sufficient means to enable him to pay the fee prescribed by law for the plaint in such suit. This provision has been enacted by the legislature with the object to enable poor persons who are too poor to pay the court-fee to file their suits without the payment of necessary court-fees...
Hiralal Nansa Bhavsar and anr. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-03-1974
Reported in: 1976CriLJ84; (1974)GLR725
A.D. Desai, J.1. This case is referred to this Full Bench for deciding the question as to whether the appeal filed by the accused against their order of conviction in Summary Case No. 1528 of 1973 by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Ahmedabad, under Section 66 of the Bombay Prohibition Act can lie in this Court in view of repealing and saving provisions of Section 484 of the nal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the New Code). The question arises in this manner. The two accused-appellants were charge-sheeted before the City Magistrate. 10th Court. Ahmedabad on August 25. 1973 for having committed offence under Section 66(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act. It was alleged that the accused had committed the said offence on August 25. 1973. The learned City Magistrate, 10th Court, recorded the plea of the accused on December 10. 1973 The evidence was recorded by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, on April 8. 1974 and the said Magistrate found both the accused guilty ...
S. Dayal and anr. Vs. Ambalal Kuberdas Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Guj194
J.B. Mehta, J.1. The District Development Officer and the Ahmedabad District Panchayat, hereinafter referred to as 'the Panchayat', have filed this appeal as the learned Single Judge quashed the order of the District Development Officer removing the petitioner on August 21, 1971, and gave a declaration that he continued in service and was entitled to all emoluments and other benefits arising from his said appointment. The respondent originally joined service as a clerk in July 15, 1941, and thereafter he was made Assistant Accountant in the Ahmedahad District School Board from December 2, 1961. The Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Panchayat Act' came into farce from April 1, 1963 under which the Ahmedabad District School Board was dissolved. Therefore, the petitioner was allocated to the District Panchayat from August 1, 1963, by the order, dated July 8, 1966, The D.D.O. transferred the petitioner to Agricultural branch under the District Panchayat and that...
Shamji Karshan Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-1974
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1256; (1975)1GLR313
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. The Division Bench consisting of D. A. Desai and A. N. Surti, JJ., has referred the following question to & larger Bench which has now been placed before us:Who would be the appointing authority in respect of a servant belonging to the State Service prior to his allocation to the Panchayat Service on his allocation to Panchayat Service becoming final and on his becoming a member of the Panchayat Service and who, accordingly, would be competent to remove him from service ?2. In order to appreciate the contentions which have been taken up before us in this appeal, a few facts need be stated. In Special Case No. 1 of 1972 in the Court of the learned Special Judge, Amreli, two accused were put up for trial in respect of offences punishable under Sections 409 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Out of the two accused, accused No. 1 was convicted and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and also to fine. As re...
Navjivan Paper Mart Vs. Raikot Vibhagiva Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-02-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Guj18; (1975)0GLR80
D.P. Desai, J.1. The petitioner is a purchaser of a cutting machine from respondent No. 2 who had secured a loan from respondent No. 1 Co-operative Back for purchasing the said machine and had created a charge on that machine in favour of respondent No. 1 Bank. As a result of this transaction of loan by respondent No. 2 with respondent No, 1 Bank of which respondent No. 2 was, at the relevant time a member, arbitration proceedings under the provisions of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) came to be instituted by respondent No. I Bank against the present petitioner, respondent No. 2 and another person who was the surety of respondent No. 2. Those proceedings came to be started by respondent No. 1 Bank for the recovery of its dues advanced to respondent No. 2. The total amount of the dues including interest, notice charges and liquidation charges for which the claim was made under the provisions of the Act was Rs. 2,155.10 Ps. In these proc...
Babubhai Mulchanddas Kapadia Vs. Ishwarlal Devchand Kabrawala
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-01-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Guj95; (1975)0GLR66
ORDER1. This revision application is directed against the order passed on 11th Feb., 1974 by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge (J. D.), Surat, directing the defendant to write in the open court contents of writings Q-1 and Q-2 as desired by the Assistant Government Examiner of Questioned Documents.2. The petitioner is original plaintiff. The respondent is original defendant. The plaintiff filed civil suit no. 1207 of 1969 against the defendant for ejectment. The plaintiff relied upon the rent note dated 15-1-1962 in respect of the suit premises alleged to be executed by the defendant. The plaintiff also relied upon a writing dated 31st October, 1963 below the rent note. In the said suit the defendant filed an application dated 17th April, 1972 and contended that the defendant had put the signature at the end of the rent note, but the defendant had not put his signature at the end of the writing below the rent note. The defendant contended that the, writing below the rent note and signa...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›