Gujarat Court August 1978 Judgments
State of Gujarat Vs. Ramji Mandir Trust, Baroda and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Guj113; (1979)0GLR399
Thakkar, J. 1 to 3. x x x x 4. To grant or not to grant leave to urge this new plea of 'Act of State' is the question we must resolve at the threshold in our opinion, whether or not the Municipal Court has jurisdiction, to try the suit from the standpoint of the plea of 'Act of State' is a mixed question of law and facts. Such a plea must in, the first, place be raised in the written statement. An issue must be framed on this question and parties must have an opportunity to adduce evidence on this plea. It is possible that in a given case a pointed issue may not be raised and yet the parties may have understood that defence of 'Act of State' was sought to be urged and parties may adduce evidence on the point. So far as the present case is concerned, apart from the fact that there was no such plea in the written statement and no such issue was raised, the parties never realised that the defence of 'Act of State' was sought to be relied upon by the State in order to defeat the present su...
Tag this Judgment!Charity Commissioner, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad Vs. Rustom Faramroz Dab ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-24-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Guj168; (1979)0GLR635
ORDER1. By the last Will and Testament of one Rustamji Khurshedji Bamji of Navsari dated 24th August, 1910, a public trust was created called 'Rustamji Khurshedji Bamji Muktad Trust Fund, Navsari'.' The respondents herein are the trustees under the said will. The respondent-trustees executed a deed of conveyance in respect -of four buildings bearing Municipal Nos. 287, 287/1, 287/5 and 288 of S. No. 91 of Tika No. 13/2 situate near Golwad Naka in the town of Navsari to the Navsari Municipality on January 24, 1977 for a sum of Rs. 40,000/-. It appears that the respondent-trustees had applied on 22nd March 1976 before the -Charity Commissioner, Ahmedabad, for according sanction to the proposed sale. The Charity Commissioner was of the Opinion that the Will under which the trust was settled did not empower the trustees to sell the trust properties and therefore advise the trustees to obtain necessary directions in the matter by approaching the competent Court. The respondent-trustees, the...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Trustees of Shri Maneklal C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-23-1978
Reported in: (1979)GLR248; (1979)0GLR248
Divan, C.J.1. In this case, which is an appeal on a point of law under the provisions of s. 269H of the I.T. Act, 1961, one point on which arguments have been advanced is regarding the failure on the part of the Tribunal to give an opportunity of being heard to the valuation officer nominated by the competent authority under section 269L(3). Under the scheme of Chap. XX-A which covers ss. 269A to 269S, provision has been made for acquisition under s. 269F by the order of the competent authority when in the case of sale of any immovable property. the competent authority comes to the conclusion that the immovable property to which the proceedings relate is of a fair market exceeding twenty-five thousand rupees and that the fair market value of the property exceeds the apparent consideration thereof by more than fifteen per cent. and that it is for one of the objects mentioned in s. 269C(1), cls. (a) and (b). In the instant case, the competent authority came to the conclusion that the req...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Trustees of Shri Maneklal C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-23-1978
Reported in: (1980)8CTR(Guj)147; [1980]125ITR417(Guj)
DIVAN C. J. - In this case, which is an appeal on a point of law under the provisions of s. 269H of the I.T. Act, 1961, one point on which arguments have been advanced is regarding the failure on the part of the Tribunal to give an opportunity of being heard to the valuation officer nominated by the competent authority under section 269L(3). Under the scheme of Chap. XX-A which covers ss. 269A to 269S , provision has been made for acquisition under s. 269F by the order of the competent authority when in the case of sale of any immovable property. the competent authority comes to the conclusion that the immovable property to which the proceedings relate is of a fair market exceeding twenty-five thousand rupees and that the fair market value of the property exceeds the apparent consideration thereof by more than fifteen per cent. and that it is for one of the objects mentioned in s. 269C(1), cls. (a) and (b) . In the instant case, the competent authority came to the conclusion that the r...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Harshadray Jayantilal and Co.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-22-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR387
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The plaintiff filed Special Suits Nos. 86 of 1974 and 87 of 1974 against the Western Railway administration in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Rajkot. The suits were filed under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. He prayed that the Western Railway administration should be directed to file the original arbitration agreements in Court and that an order of reference to arbitration of the disputes between the parties be made. The learned trial Judge after hearing the parties made in each case an order directing the Western Railway administration to file the original agreement between the parties in the Court. He also recorded in his final order that the Divisional Superintendent, Western Railway administration, Rajkot, would be the arbitrator between the parties. The Divisional Superintendent, Western Railway, Rajkot, was directed to submit his award to the Court within 12 months from the date of the Impugned order.2. Two such identical orders made in the...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Parshottam Ambavi Vs. Patel Hansraj Valji Bhalodia
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-21-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR7
S.H. Sheth, J.1. This appeal arises out of execution proceedings. The appellant is the judgment-debtor and the respondent is the decree-holder. Decree-holder filed Civil Suit No. 34 of 1968 for recovering from the judgment-debtor a sum of Rs. 9,500/- which were advanced in 1966. He also prayed for interest and costs. On 30th April 1969 the trial Court passed in flavor of the decree-holder decree for the entire amount with interest and costs. In order to recover the decretal debt, the decree-holder filed Execution Application No. 48 of 1969. In order to recover the decretal debt, the decree-holder attached the judgment-debtor's l/3rd share in agricultural lands which in all admeasured 32 acres 14 gunthas. To this attachment the judgment-debtor raised the objection. He contended that the lands which were attached did not belong to him. He therefore prayed for raising the attachment. This objection was rejected by the Executing Court. Thereafter the judgment-debtor's wife and children rai...
Tag this Judgment!Firm of Sarabhai Hathising and anr. Vs. Ratilal Nathalal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Guj110; (1979)0GLR484
S.H. Sheth, J. 1. The plaintiff filed the present suit against the defendants to recover a sum of Rs. 23,528-85 p. which consisted of the principal amount of Rs. 22,342-50 p. lent by the plaintiff to defendant 1 firm and Rs. 1186-35 as and by way of interest. Defendant 1 is the firm to which moneys were advanced by the plaintiff from time to time. Defendants 2 to 11 are the partners thereof. The suit was filed in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad as a summary suit. After the defendants entered their appearance in the suit, the plaintiff took out summons for judgment. At the hearing of the summons for judgment, defendants 2 to 8 and 10 admitted the plaintiff's claim. Therefore, decree on admission was passed against them. Defendants 1, 9 and 11 contested the suit. They were granted unconditional leave to defend the suit. In the written statement which they filed, they raised three principal contentions. According to them, the suit was barred by time defendants 2 to and 10 had no authori...
Tag this Judgment!Co-operative Bar Association Vs. Under Secretary to the Govt. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR361
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. An Association of members of the legal profession practising before the various authorities constituted under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act of 1951, known as 'Co-operative Bar Association' has been obliged to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the members of the Bar apprehend criminal prosecution under Sub-section (2) of Section 145 of the Act for forming themselves into an Association bearing a name which includes the word 'Co-operative', upon an impossible interpretation being placed in regard to the provision contained in Section 146(1) by the competent authority.2. The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner Association has been formed by the members of the legal profession in order to deal with problems generally affecting the members of the profession with particular regard to those who are practising before the various authorities constituted under the Act. It does not carry on any business or any t...
Tag this Judgment!Kantilal Amratlal and ors. Vs. Snehlata Vipinchandra Mehta and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR490
B.K. Mehta, J.1. A short but interesting question arises, whether Civil Court can execute a sale deed on behalf of a judgment-debtor against whom a decree for specific performance has been passed in respect of a building situate within the urban agglomeration to which the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 applies in view of the prohibition contained against transfer of such properties under Section 27 of the said Act, The question arises in the following circumstances:2. One Amratlal Manchharam had executed an agreement to sell a building bearing Nondh No. 1016 situate within Ward No. 2 of Sagrampura main road in the city of Surat in favour of opponent No. 1 herein for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards which Rs. 6,000/- were paid to the vendor as earnest money. As the vendor failed to execute a deed of sale in pursuance of the said agreement, opponent No. 1 was required to file the suit in the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.) Surat being Special Civil Suit No. 98 of 1968 for specifi...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Hansraj C. Patel Vs. Darji Narsi Damji and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-1978
Reported in: (1979)1GLR224
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is a second appeal by the original defendant of the Civil Suit No. 125 of 1971 filed by the respondents-plaintiffs in the court of the Civil Judge (J.D.) Gondal, who was pleased to decree the plaintiff's suit. In the- Civil Appeal No. 60 of 1974 filed by the present appellant-original defendant, in the District Court at Rajkot, the learned Assistant Judge at Gondal was pleased to substantially confirm the decree, but modify it a little in respect of some detail. Hence the original defendant has preferred the present second appeal.2. The plaintiffs had filed the aforesaid suit for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant-appellant to remove the construction made by him touching the southern wall of the plaintiffs' eastern house to the extent of 10' from east to west because the said construction interfered with the plaintiffs' right of dropping eaves on the defendant's property. The learned trial Judge had also issued a perpetual injunction restraining the de...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »