Gujarat Court December 1979 Judgments
Chalthan Kamdar Mandal and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Labour and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-1979
Reported in: (1979)2GLR169
B.J. Divan, C.J.1. The first petitioner is Chalthan Kamdar Mandal and the second petitioners are the five elected representatives of Magdoot and United Dyeing & Printing Works, Kabilpore, Navsari. The grievance of the petitioners is that the first respondent herein, the Commissioner of Labour for the State of Gujarat, is not issuing to them failure certificates on failure of conciliation proceedings before the Conciliator who is the second respondent in this special civil application. The case of the petitioners is that Chalthan Kamdar Mandal, the first petitioners, is that approved union under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act so far as the dyeing and printing works in Navsari Taluka of Valsad District are concerned. In order to expedite solution of labour problems, the Mandal applied to Government Labour Officer, Bulsar, to elect live representative under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, Section 28, so far as Meghdoot Dyeing & Printing Works were concerned. Five representatives...
Tag this Judgment!Mohmad Asgar Abdul Karim Vs. Abdul Basir Abdul and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-21-1979
Reported in: (1979)2GLR423
S.H. Sheth, J.1. In the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Surat, the plaintiff has filed Civil Suit No. 226 of 1976 for the administration of the estate of deceased Abdul Rehman Abdul who died on 25th February 1968 and for the determination of his share under the will executed by Abdule Rehman. The suit is pending. He valued the suit at Rs. 200/- and paid on the plaint a Court-fee of Rs. 40/-. The valuation made by the plaintiff and the Court-fee paid by him were challenged. The learned Judge after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was liable to pay Court-fee on the value of his 1/3rd share. By the impugned order, therefore, he called upon the plaintiff to give details of the valuation of his 1/3rd share in the property of the deceased Abdul Rehman.2. It is that order which is challenged in this Civil Revision Application.3. Mr. Shelat who appears on behalf of the plaintiff has argued that a suit for administration is nothing but a suit for accou...
Tag this Judgment!Jaswantlal Ratilal Vora (Heir of Kamlaben Ratilal Vora) Vs. Subhadrabe ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-1979
Reported in: (1980)21GLR692
S.H. Sheth, J.1. The plaintiff filed the present suit against the defendant under the Bombay Rent Act for recovering possession of the suit premises on four grounds. The defendant had been in arrears of rent. The plaintiff required the suit premises reasonably and bona fide for her own occupation. The suit premises were not used by the defendant for more than six months prior to the institution of the suit without any reasonable cause for the purpose for which they were let. The defendant had acquired suitable accommodation for her residence. The defendant denied the plaintiff's claim. Before the learned trial Judge, ground of arrears of rent was not pressed. The learned trial Judge, on merits, negatived three other grounds and dismissed the plaintiff's suit.2. The plaintiff appealed against the decree to the appellate Court. Before the appellate Court, the plaintiff pressed two grounds and sought decree for possession against the defendant. The ground relating to non-user of the suit ...
Tag this Judgment!Vinodkumar Hematram Dave Vs. Secondary Education Tribunal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-17-1979
Reported in: (1980)21GLR573
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. Offer and acceptance notwithstanding, a letter of firm appointment notwithstanding, a contract of service does not come into existence if it is cancelled before the appointee takes charge-such is the proposition canvassed by the Management of a Secondary School. The teacher contends that a contract of service having come into existence the Management cannot wriggle out from the purview of the Tribunal created for the avowed object of redressing such grievances by committing a breach of the contract before the stipulated date for performance. The Tribunal has agreed with the Management and shut its doors against the teacher at the threshold. The controversy has now been brought before this Court by the teacher concerned.2. The Managing Trustee of a Trust running a High School, respondent No. 2 herein, appointed the petitioner as Headmaster of a school run by the institution by an order of appointment dated February 21, 1979 as per Annexure 'A'. It was mentioned in the...
Tag this Judgment!Devchandbhai Jagubhai Patel and ors. Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1979
Reported in: 1981CriLJ684
ORDERB.J. Divan, C.J.1. Both these criminal revision applications are against the same judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Broach, in a criminal appeal which he dismissed. The appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge was against the judgment and order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Broach, by which the learned Magistrate convicted three persons of the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act and sentenced each of the three persons to rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default rigorous imprisonment for two months. The facts leading to this case are as follows: On November 20, 1969 at about 9-00 p.m. one Ambassador motor car bearing No. GJG 5446 approached the bridge across the Narmada at Broach. It came from Baroda side and was proceeding towards Surat. It was intercepted by the customs officers of Broach at the northern end of Narmada Bridge. Accused No. 1 was driving the car, accused No....
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-ii Vs. Premanand Industrial Co-ope ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-13-1979
Reported in: (1980)16CTR(Guj)6; [1980]124ITR772(Guj)
Divan, C.J. 1. In this group of six appeals the order of the Tribunal is common and the appeals arise out of the acquisition under Chap. XX-A of three open plots of land sold or purported to be sold by the same transferors to three different co-operative societies. The transferors in these three transactions are Ramanlal Motiram and three others who were all co-owners of the three plots of land situated on the outskirts of Surat. The three transferee-co-operative societies are Nand Industrial Co-operative Service Society Ltd., Anand Industrial Co-operative Service Society Ltd. and Paramanand Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. By three sale deeds, the transferors sold to the respective industrial co-operative service society different plots of land roughly admeasuring about ten or eleven thousand square yards on the outskirts of Surat for considerations which were mentioned in the respective sale deeds. These sale deeds were registered on December 31, 1973. The District Valuation Offi...
Tag this Judgment!Ravraja Padamsinhji Dolatsinhji and anr. Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-12-1979
Reported in: (1979)2GLR385
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is an interesting petition, raising the question of interpretation of the grant, Annexure B. The petitioners are collaterals of one Hamirsinhji, who died on 8-1-75 and who was the brother of the onetime Ruler of the Idcr State. The Ruler had conferred on said Hamisinhji the rights of two villages, Techava and Acharal, as per his order No. 14 dated 11-3-48. Said Hamirsinhji was carrying on operations of extracting China clay from the sub-soil of those two villages and he had entered into an agreement of lease with one firm M/s. Ambee India Private Ltd. On the demise of said Hamirsinhji, the present petitioners, who are his near agnates claimed to have inherited all the rights, which deceased Hamirsinhji had. The Collector, however, held by his impugned order, Annexure D, that despite the recognition of the rights of deceased Hamirsinhji vis-a-vis the State by the Division Bench of this Court in the reported judgment of M/s. Ambee India Pvt. Ltd. v. Rao Raja Hamirsi...
Tag this Judgment!Shantaben Jerambhai Chavda and ors. Vs. Lallubhai Jerambhai Chavda
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-11-1979
Reported in: AIR1980Guj152
ORDER1. This civil revision application has been filed by the appellants in the First Appeal against the-order of the Taxing Officer refusing the refund of court-fees under Section 15 of the Bombay Court-Fees Act, 1959.2. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition and accounts against his brothers and mother. The learned trial Judge passed preliminary decree in the suit, Thereafter accounts were taken and final decree was passed by the trial Court. It was challenged by the defendants in First Appeal No. 872 of 1977. By its final order, this Court remanded the case to the learned' trial Judge for deciding afresh on merits. The defendants-appellants thereafter made an application under Section 15 of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1969, for refund of court-fees paid by them on the memorandum of appeal. The Taxing Officer dismissed the application. It is that order which is challenged under Section 4 of the Bombay Court-Fees Act, 1959, in this civil revision application.3. Under Section 15 of ...
Tag this Judgment!Ranchhodbhai Jorabhai Vs. Bai Rai D/O Patel Karsanbhai Gulab and W/O R ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-1979
Reported in: (1979)2GLR575
ORDERAs per Ex. 55, this Darkhast is withdrawn Cost on D.H. 29-7-1965.Sd/-C.J. (S.D.)The interpretation of the aforesaid order is to decide the fate of the present appeal.7. After having obtained the permission from the Collector Baroda on 3-1-1970, at stated above, the appellant re-presented the present Darkhast against the same judgment debtors for the same reliefs as he originally prayed in Darkhast No. 21/56. The said Darkhast was filed on 28-1-1971 in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) Baroda and it was numbered as Darkhast No. 4/71. In all respect, the execution application i.e. Darkhast No. 4/71 was identical with the earlier Darkhast No. 21/56, save and except the tact that in the second execution application the latter development which took place pursuant to the High Court order in F.A. No. 100/60 and the further development leading to the permission of the Collector which was granted on 3-1-1970 were mentioned, but the reliefs prayed for in Darkhast No. 4/71 were completely...
Tag this Judgment!Bhoi Vanaji Dhulaji and anr. Vs. Patel Shivabhai Kashibhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-1979
Reported in: 1981ACJ107; AIR1980Guj154; (1979)2GLR342
M.K. Shah, J.1. The appellants, who are the original claimants, filed claim petition No. 95 of 1974 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal of Kaira at Nadiad claiming compensation in respect of the death of their son Balabhai arising out of an accident which occurred in the early hours of 15th May, 1,974 near Andharia Chakla in village Napad. The claimants alleged that these were the days when there was railway strike and the Government had permitted goods carrying vehicles to carry passengers 'there in. Claimant No. I who is the father of the deceased, and others had been returning from a marriage party to Kaira traveling in a trailor attached to tractor No. GJS 3972 belonging to opponent No.1 Patel Shivabhai Kashibhai and it was driven by his driver-opponent No 2 Patel Kantibhai Somabhai and was insured with opponent No. 3 insurance company. It was the case of the claimants that on account of a rash and negligent act of driving an the part of the -driver of the said tractor, the t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »