Gujarat Court March 1983 Judgments
Kiritkumar Gandalal Shah Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-30-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Guj235; (1983)2GLR1102
ORDERS.L. Talati, J.1. The respondent, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, is a Government of India undertaking, and is engaged in distribution of Kerosene and light diesel Oil (L.D.O.), and it has the sole monopoly in allotment of dealership and distributorship of kerosene and L. D. O. The respondent is the State within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution.2. The respondent Company in May, 1979 gave an advertisement in Several Newspapers for appointment of dealer for Baroda-Sankheda region in Baroda district for kerosene and L. D. O. Applications were invited from public for appointment of dealer for kerosene and L. D. O. in Baroda-Sankheda region. About 70 or 80 persons ' applied in response to that advertisement. The advertisement required certain educational qualifications, business capacity, capacity to Secure sales and management, and it further provided that the person whose parents, husband or wife, brother or sister, sons or daughters, if any of them have got dealership then...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendrakumar Chandulal Vs. Central Bank of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-30-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR237
R.J. Shah, J.1. Appellant, a registered partnership firm, having lost in the trial Court has come in appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated June 30, 1975 passed in Civil Suit No. 2321 of 1974 by the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad. Respondent-bank is the original defendant.2. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, a few facts will need to be stated. Appellant had opened a pledge account with the respondent. Pledged bales of cloth belonging to the appellant were kept in a godown which belonged to the appellant but which was under the direct control and supervision of the respondent pursuant to the pledge agreement between the parties. The said godown was, therefore, operated by the respondent whenever needed in the presence of the agent of the appellant with the keys which remained in possession and safe custody of the respondent. On April 17, 1974, appellant's agent went to take delivery of 2 bales along with the godown keeper of the respondent. It was then noticed that th...
Tag this Judgment!Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Memorial Society and anr. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-30-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1329
S.L. Talati, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is the society registered under the Societies Registration Act and petitioner No. 2 is the Director of petitioner No. 1-society. Petitioner No. 1-Society was also registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trust Act. Now these petitioners have filed this petition for getting quashed and set aside the Government resolution, dated 11-12-1980 which is annexure 'E' to the petition and also getting quashed and set aside the letter, dated 18-12-1980 which is produced at annexure 'D'. Further relief prayed is that an injunction may be granted against the respondents and they may be restrained from implementing the resolution, dated 11-12-1980.2. The facts as they emerge are as under : Petitioner No. 1 is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It is registered with the objects of raising National Memorial in the memory of late Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and to carry such activities to fulfill the ideals for which late Sardar Vallab...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Haribhai Vallabhbhai Darj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-23-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Guj210; (1983)2GLR916
Shah, J.1. This group of first appeals arises out of an unfortunate incident which has taken lives of four ladies and injured two persons on the spot at village Kukar-vada, District Mehsana on 23rd Jan., 1977. One Tejmahmad, hereinafter called as 'driver' was working as a driver with the appellant S. T. Corporation. The driver was serving under the Himatnagar Division of the appellant-Corporation in Jan., 1977. He was required to take one painter in trainee bus of the S. T. Corporation, at Vijapur and Mansa Depots for painting the sign-boards at places under those two Depots. Yasinmiya was the painter. The bus was bearing No. GJJ 7366. After completing the work of painting at Village Umiyauagar at about 2.15 p.m., the driver and the said painter Yasinmiya went to Kukarwada for doing painting work, if there was a pick-up stand at Village Kukarwada. Near the banyan tree they stopped the bus and there they had not found any pick-up stand which was required to be painted. According to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Water Supply Sewerage Board Vs. Unique Electors (Gujarat) (Pvt ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-22-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1390
S.L. Talati, J.1. The petitioner is the Board constituted under the provisions of Gujarat Water Supply Sewerage Board Act, 1978 and it has come to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and by that petition the order passed by the Civil Judge (S. D.), Narol in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 231 of 1981 dated 30-11-1981 18 30-11-1981 18 challenged. The order passed by respondent No. 2, the Sole Arbitrator appointed by the order of the Civil Judge, Narol is also challenged and both orders are produced at annexures 'A' and 'B' to the petition.2. The short facts which are required to be stated for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under.:Some pipelines were required to be laid for Bhavnagar city somewhere in the year 1976. It was a scheme sanctioned by the state Government and known as Bhavnagar City Water Supply Scheme based on Shetrunji Dam. The work was entrusted to respondent No. 1. There were disputes between the parties and it appears that responden...
Tag this Judgment!Jethiben Vs. Maniben and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Guj194; (1983)2GLR993
ORDERV.V. Bedarkar, J.1. This is a revision petition against the order dated 30-10-1982 pass-ed by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Mehsana, below application Ex. 210 in Regular Civil Suit No. 202 of 1979, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to transpose her as a plaintiff, and the plaintiff of that suit who wanted to withdraw the suit should be transposed as defendant No. 2.2. The case has an interesting history. The petitioner purchased a property bearing Block No. 8/A situated in Alkapuri Housing Society. Mehsana, for an amount of Rs. 25.000 from one Babaldas Laxmandas Patel (present opponent No. 2) by a sale-deed dated 26-4-1977. In the said sale-deed opponent No. 2 had also assured the present petitioner to help and co-operate for a complete transfer of the said property in the name of the petitioner in the records of the Municipality, Government and the Society. It was also the case of opponent No. 2 in the sale-deed that no person other than opponent No. 2 ...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanshyam Vijay Oil Mills and ors. Vs. Thacker Ranchhoddas Ratanshi an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-18-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1217
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is an appeal by the original plaintiffs of the Civil Suit No. 21 of 1965 filed by them in the court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) Kutch at Bhuj for the purpose of realising Rs. 28,250/-, which suit was dismissed by the learned trial Judge with costs on the ground that the suit was filed by a firm, which, though required to be registered with the Registrar of Firms under Section 59 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, was not registered and as per Section 69(1) of the said Act, the suit was incompetent. It is this Judgment and decree that are assailed by the original plaintiffs by preferring the present appeal.2. The suit, as filed, was filed by the plaintiff No. 1 firm Shri Ghanshyani Vijay Oil Mills and by its two partners. The suit was for recovering the principal amount allegedly lying with the defendant-firm as the amount of deposit, which though demanded, was not returned. The reading of the plaint shows that the cause of action had accrued to the plaintiffs some...
Tag this Judgment!iqbal Ibrahim Shaikh Vs. State
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-17-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR929
A.P. Ravani, J.1. Can our society claim any moral or ethical right to be harsh towards citizens who are forced to commit petty offences on account of compelling necessities of life This question has surfaced in this petition.2. The petitioner-accused has been convicted for an offence of theft under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Metro-politan Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case No. 1229 of 1982 decided on December 10, 1982 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further R.I. for one month. The accused preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 336 of 1982 in the court of City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad. The learned City Sessions Judge confirmed the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court by his order dated February 21, 1983. Against the orders of the lower courts the petitioner-accused has preferred the present petition.3. The petitioner has been con...
Tag this Judgment!Banabibi Sikandarkhan and anr. Vs. Sikandarkhan Umarkhan and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-16-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1382; (1983)2GLR1098
A.P. Ravani, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is the wife of opponent No. 1, who claimed maintenance for herself and for minor son born out of the wedlock between the parties. The marriage of petitioner No. l and opponent No. 1 took place some time in' the . year 1975 according to the Mohmedan law and customs at village Garadi Taluka Sinor. District-Vadodara. The petitioner-wife alleged that the opponent-husband was staying at village Palej and carrying on business as well as doing service in Railway and was earning about Rs. 1,500 per month. That after the marriage, she lived with the opponent-husband but some time thereafter she was severely beaten and driven out. Again after some time she had gone to live with the opponent-husband but she was driven out this time also. Minor son, on whose behalf also maintenance is claimed was born on June 17, 1976. The application for maintenance under S. 125 of the Criminal P C. was filed on July 23. 1979. The trial court rejected that application by its ord...
Tag this Judgment!Nagarbhai Motibhai Makwana Vs. the District Panchayat, Mehsana
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-15-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj114; (1983)2GLR1211
1. This appeal, at the instance of the original applicant-firm, who are the building contractors, is directed against the order of the learned Civil Judge (S. D.) Mehsana dated March 31, 1981 dismissing the application of the appellant to set aside the award made by one Shri G. T. Panchigar, Superintending Engineer, Gandhinagar Panchayat, dated October 16, 1976. It appears that the appellant had filed a suit, being Special Civil Suit No.115 of 1973 for recovery of Rs. 11,000/- against Mehsana District Panchayat-respondent No. I herein. The said Panchayat had filed a Cross Regular Civil Suit No. 281 of 1973 against the present appellant for recovery of Rs. 8,029-45 Ps. after giving credit for the amount claimed by the appellant in their suit, It appears that the learned Civil Judge was moved jointly by the parties of the afore-said two suits by their application dated July 19, 1975 (vide Ex, 39) to refer the entire dispute to the arbitration of one Shri B. K. Engineer, Superintending En...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »