Gujarat Court January 1983 Judgments
Union of India Vs. Tata Chemicals, Mithapur
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1983
Reported in: 1984(2)ECC91; 1983LC467D(Gujarat); 1983(12)ELT776(Guj)
V.V. Bedarkar, J.1. We have heard the main appeal with Civil Application No. 391 of 1983. Since in our view, the said Civil Application for adjournment of hearing of the appeal was nothing but an attempt to stall the hearing of this first appeal, which was fixed for being heard on 24-1-1983, we have rejected the same by a separate order and detailed reasons thereof are recorded in the order passed therein. 2. So far as the facts are concerned, they are as follows : The respondent-company (original plaintiff) filed a suit, being Special Civil Suit No. 50 of 1980, against the Union of India and others (present appellants) in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jamnagar, for recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,02,46,701.52 paise on the ground that this amount represented excise duty which was illegally collected by the Excise department from the plaintiff-company. The plaintiff-company has a factory at Mithapur in Jamnagar District and it manufactures Soda Ash. This commodity falls ...
Tag this Judgment!Soni Natverlal Prabhudas and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1124; (1983)2GLR945
ORDERD.H. Shukla, J.1. The petitioner No. 1. Soni Natverlal Prabhudas, is an elder brother of petitioner No. 2 Soni Jinabhai alias Hasmukhlal Prabhu-das, who has been added as petitioner No. 2 during I he pendency of this application, vide order dated 22-3-1982. The petitioner No. 2 had purchased, allegedly in good faith, a golden chain weighing 1 Tola and 10 annas for Rs 2840/- (rupees two thousand eight hundred forty only at his aforesaid shop at Viramgam in the afternoon on 22-2-1982 from a person who introduced himself to be belonging to village Panar, Taluka Viramgam, which is at a distance of about 10 Kms. from Viramgam. The petitioner No. 2 had no reason whatever to suspect the said property to be a stolen one at the time of the aforesaid purchase. It is alleged that petitioner No. 2 paid a reasonable market price for the said property as stated above.2. to 4. * * * * * 5. This application was presented by the petitioner No. 1 on 19-3-1982 while the petitioner No. 2 was in Polic...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Financial Corporation Vs. National Rifles Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR924
B.K. Mehta, J. 1. The Appellant-Corporation has filed suit being Special Civil Suit No. 64 of 1976 in the Court of Civil Judges (S.D.) Ahmedabad, (Rural) at Narol for the recovery of the amount advanced to respondent No. 1-Company the repayment of which was guaranteed by respondent No. 2-Company. Respondent No. 3-Company was joined as a party-defendant since they also claimed interest as second mortgagees of the suit properties of the respondent No. 1-Company.2. The reliefs claimed in the suit against respondent No. 1-Company were for a decree of the amount that may be found due from respondent No. 1-Company & for the sale the hypothecated and mortgaged properties of the said Company. As regards respondent No. 2-Company the plaintiff-corporation prayed for the relief of a decree for the amount of money advanced and found due and payable as on the date of the suit the repayment of which was guaranteed by respondent No. 2-Company. It appears that in the course of hearing of the suit, an ...
Tag this Judgment!The Sindhy Resettlement Corporation Ltd. Vs. Ambavi Raghu
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Guj233; (1983)2GLR1035
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The respondent who is the original plaintiff of Special Civil Suits Nos. 218 and 219 of 1979 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (S. D.) Kutch at Bhuj made an application to file in the Court the arbitration agreement contained in the contract of construction entered into between the respondent-plaintiff and the appellant-Corporation which was the defendant in the said suits and also praying for appointment of Arbitrator. It is not necessary to trace the entire history of litigation but suffice it to say that the alleged arbitration agreement contained in the supply contract enjoined the parties to refer every dispute, difference or question which may at any time arise between the parties hereto, or their breaches which may touch or arise out of or in respect of the said contract to the sole arbitration of the Chief Engineer of the appellant-Corporation. It is common ground that the post of Chief Engineer was vacant at the relevant time. One of the objections raised...
Tag this Judgment!Abasaheb Dinkarrao Bhonsle Vs. the Collector, Valsad and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-28-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj14; (1983)2GLR1009
ORDER1. This civil revision application is, filed by the present petitioner who is the plaintiff in the suit against the judgment and order dated 16th Oct. 1982 passed by the learned District Judge, Valsad at Navsari in iscellaneous Civil Application No. 39 of 1982 dismissing the appeal filed against the order below Exh. 5 passed by the learned Civil Judge,, Senior Division, Valsad in Regular Civil Suit No. 123/82 whereby the application for interim relief of the pre sent petitioner was rejected.2. The contentions raised in the suit by the present petitioner pertained to his alleged tenancy rights in respect of the suit premises. The present petitioner claims in the suit that the suit premises were let out to h6 by the landlord respondent 4 herein and that the order of the Collector, Valsid requiring the petitioner to Vacate, the suit premises on his being transferred from Valsad to Navsari is illegal, void and inoperative in law. The petitioner had prayed for the interim stay of the o...
Tag this Judgment!B.K. Suthar Vs. State and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR932
B.K. Mehta, J.1. It is one of more such cases where a simple claim of correction of birth date is avoided by shunting the papers from pillar to post. The petitioner joined the services in P. W. D. in August, 1951 and at all the relevant times of this petition, was working as Executive. Engineer in Building and Communication Division of P. W. D. at Surendra-nagar. The petitioner made an application for correction of his birth date in the month of January, 1977 by making appropriate application annexing documentary evidence in support of the correct age which he was claiming to enter in his service records in place of the original date entered therein. The application was addressed to the Secretary and Chief Engineer, Building & Communication Department in the P. W. D. The application was sought to be forwarded through proper channel and was, therefore, routed through the Superintending Engineer, Baroda, to the Government since the petitioner was working in Baroda division at that time. ...
Tag this Judgment!Harsukh Hemchand Parekh Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-1983
Reported in: (1983)1GLR610
S.L. Talati, J.1. The petitioner was original accused No. 1 in Criminal Case No. 2279 of 1980 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhuj-Kutch. The prosecution case against him was that he was posted at Sukhpar Post office temporarily from 27-9-1979 in place of one Shri R.L. Pathak who was on leave. The allegation was that he committed criminal breach of trust in respect of a sum Rs. 11,000/- and also falsified the accounts and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 409 and 477 A of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 7,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one year. He preferred Criminal Appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1982 which was heard by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhuj-Kutch. He maintained the conviction of the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 409 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code. However, his sentence was reduced and he was ordered to unde...
Tag this Judgment!Kharva Hiralal Damji Vs. Shri Vichai Ratnabash and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-1983
Reported in: (1983)1GLR584
D.H. Shukla, J.1. The appellant, Kharva Hiralal Damji, filed a complaint against respondent No. 1 under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Veraval, being Fozdari Case No. 1248 of 1977. It was the case of the appellant that he was working in the factory of the respondent No. 1 at Veraval and on 14-2-1977, a charge-sheet was issued by the respondent No. 1 wherein serious allegations were levelled against the appellant and in the submission of the appellant, those allegations amounted to culpable defamation. The said complaint was fixed for hearing on 13-10-1977 on which date the appellant-complainant could not remain present as being a Home Guard Cadet, he was required to attend to 'Bandobast' on account of the Prime Minister's visit to Veraval and therefore, the learned Magistrate passed the following order:The complainant is found absent when called out and hence the complaint is dismissed.13-10-77. J.M.F.C.2. The appellant sub...
Tag this Judgment!Harmanbhai Bhulabhai by Lrs. and ors. Vs. Dahyabhai Babarbhai Patel an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj15; (1983)1GLR758
ORDER1. In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, which in substance is one under Art. 227 thereof, the petitioners challenge an order passed by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in TEN. B. A. No. 549 of 1976, dt. 23-3-1977 at Annexure 'C' to the petition, where under the Tribunal took the view that the proceedings under S. 32-G(1) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') were void and equally the appellate order of the Deputy Collector was also void.2. In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioners in this petition, it is necessary to note a few relevant facts. The petitioners filed an application on 8-11-1981 before the. ALT and Mamlatdar, Anand for getting fixed the purchase price Of land bearing S. No., 1082/1, admeasuring 0 acre 38 guntas situated in the sim of Arland town of Kheda district. The petitioners contended that they were cultivating the said land since long They, had become deemed purchasers of the sai...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhudas Kalyanji and ors. Vs. Haji Hasan Haji Yusuf Maklal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-21-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Guj119; (1983)1GLR792
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. 1. to. 6. x x x 7. This brings me to the second important question arising in this second appeal. The important question in this appeal is whether the municipality has got any powers to, let put the public street land. As noted above, the plaintiff asserted in the plaint that it was never lawful for the municipality to let out the public street land whereas the defendants on the other hand contended that the defendant No. 1 could. So the first question to be decided by me is whether there is an absolute ban on the letting out of this street land. The extreme proposition put forward by the plaintiff is difficult to be sustained in view of the legal position, though it is to be conceded forthwith that under Section 80 of the Act, all property specified in various clauses of Sub-section (2), which includes all public streets and pavements, which are vested in and belong to the municipality, are to be held by the municipality and applied by the municipality as a trustee su...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »