Gujarat Court August 1983 Judgments
H.U.F. Bai Nani and anr. Vs. Baroda Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR526
S.A. Shah, J.1. This group of fourteen petitions raises a common question regarding the legality of the annual rateable value of the property known as 'Navrang Talkies' situated in the city of Baroda. It is an admitted position that the Baroda Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation', revised the annual rateable value which was Rs. 20,760/- upto 1972-73 and in 1973-74 the same was revised and increased to Rs. 83,602/- per year. The owners of the Navrang Talkies have not accepted the said valuation and filed appeals and being dissatisfied with the findings thereon had filed writ petitions being Special Civil Application Nos. 1186/80, 1263/80, 1264/80 1265/80, 1266/80, 1267/80 and 1268/80 (seven petitions) against the decision of the Second Extra Assistant Judge, Baroda. Similarly, as against this, the Corporation had filed petitions being Special Civil Application Nos. 490/80, 491/80, 492/80, 493/80, 494/80, 495/80 and 2166/80.2. Since all the petitions are co...
Tag this Judgment!P.P. Prabhakaran Vs. Medical Officer-in-charge and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR706
D.H. Shukla, J.1. The petitioner, P.P. Prabhakaran, residing at 13/L Railway Colony, Vishwamitri, Baroda, has preferred this Civil Revision Application having been aggrieved by the order of the 2nd Jt. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Baroda, dated 10th day of March, 1983 in Special Civil Suit No. 235 of 1980 wherein he held that he had no jurisdiction to try the suit under Section 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By the same order, therefore, he directed the plaint to be returned to the plaintiff under Order 7, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for its presentation to the proper forum in which the suit ought to have been instituted.2. The facts of the suit may be briefly stated as under:3. The petitioner-plaintiff is the father of two daughters both of whom had suffered serious ailments right from their birth allegedly on account of the negligent operation of the petitioner's wife at the time of a delivery earlier in point of time than the birth of these two daughters. The respondent No....
Tag this Judgment!N.C. Patel and ors. Vs. State and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1983
Reported in: (1983)2GLR1526
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. In this petition the petitioners are challenging the Government's failure to concede to their demand of equal pay with the librarians working in the Government and non-Government Arts Science and Commerce Colleges. The petitioners are the librarians working in the Medical Colleges and the pharmacy College which gets 100% Government Grant. The petitioners were being paid the pay-scale of Rs. 425-700/-similar to the pay-scale paid to the librarians in Arts, Science and Commerce Colleges in pursuance of the Desai Pay Commission Recommendations. There are about 500 librarians said to be working in the Government and non-Government Colleges affiliated to different Universities in Gujarat. The State Government by its resolution No. Mis/1076/45843/79-B dated 6-10-79 passed by the Education Department revised the pay scales of the librarians from Rs. 425-700 to Rs. 550-25-750-EB-30-900 with effect from 1-1-1973. The librarians employed in the Arts, Science and Commerce Colle...
Tag this Judgment!Zainubbibi D/O. Husainbhai Shaikh Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-24-1983
Reported in: (1984)2GLR887
A.P. Ravani, J.1. What is the limit up to which a wife should tolerate beating and ill-treatment by husband before asserting her right to stay separate from her husband and claim maintenance For being entitled to claim maintenance, is she required to take care of her minor child and claim custody of the child These are some of the questions which require to be resolved in this criminal revision application filed by the petitioner (wife) against an order passed by the trial Court refusing to grant her maintenance.2. The petitioner who married opponent No. 2 (husband) somewhere in the year 1970, had preferred an application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code inter alia on the ground that the opponent-husband had ill-treated her and had neglected to maintain her. The application was submitted on February 27, 1981, in the Court of J.M.F.C., Mangrol and was registered as Misc. Criminal Application No. 13 of 1981. According to her case, the opponent-husband had ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad HussaIn Suleman Shaikh and anr. Vs. Batukbhai Vaijibhai and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj66; (1984)1GLR184
1. The appellants-plaintiffs have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 25th Jan. 1983 passed by the Chamber Judge, Court No. 12, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, on Ex. 2 being an injunction application filed by them.2. Against the appellants a decree under S. 6 of the Specific Relief Act was passed in Civil Suit No. 2013/80 filed by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Respondent No. 3, Darveshali Masjid, Ahmedabad, is a Public religious trust which is managed by respondents Nos. 3/1 to 3/7 as its trustees. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 claim that they are the tenants in respect of, some portion situated between two pillars of a wall of Darveshali Masjid on Pirmohmed Shah Road, Pankornaka, Ahmedabad which is near the footpath. Re-spondents Nos. 1 and 2 have filed the above said suit for recovering the possession of the suit premises under S. 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, as the appellants took the possession of the said premises unlawfully. The said suit was decreed and th...
Tag this Judgment!Shardulkumar Jayantkumar Pasawala and ors. Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Develop ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Guj60; (1984)1GLR401
Bhatt, J.1. These two petitions by two different sets of petitioners, but against the common respondent, namely, the Ahmedabad Urban ' Development Authority constituted undo the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976, and the common respondent No. 2-the State of Gujarat raise common questions of law 1A the context or background of similar facts and they can be conveniently taken up together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. A few facts are required to be noted in order to understand. what the controversy is in these two petitions. The first two petitioners of the first petition No. 3459 of 198o contended that certain lands set out in paragraph 2 of that petition belonged to them, Out of the land, 'S. Nos. 44, 45-P, and 46-P , admeasuring 11156 sq. yds. of land belonged to the Petitioner No. 1 as the Karta of the Hindu undivided family and the land of S. No. 47-P and S.1 No. 53 admeasuring in all 40937 sq. yds, belongs to, the petitioner No. 1in his personal capa...
Tag this Judgment!i.C.G. Texturing Industry and anr. Vs. Surat Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-22-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR197
P.D. Desai, Acting C.J.1. The question which arises in this petition relates to the true and correct interpretation of Rule 17 of the Octroi Rules and Standing Orders of the respondent (Surat Municipal Corporation)(hereinafter referred to as 'the Octroi Rules').2. The first petitioner is a Company incorporated and registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. The second petitioner is the Director of the first petitioner-company. For the sake of brevity, the petitioner will be referred to as 'the petitioner' in the course of this judgment.The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing crimped texturised yarn. The registered office of the petitioner is situate at Surat, but its factory is situate at Ankleshwar, which is outside the local limits of the city of Surat. For the purpose of carrying on its manufacturing activities, the petitioner imports synthetic yarn. In respect of such imported yarn, which lands at the Bombay Port, a bill of entry is prepared and f...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Kaur Wd./O. Ajitsing Harnamsing Vs. Sohansing Khadaksing and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR345
A.P. Ravani, J.1. These two applications have been filed against an order dated July 4, 1983 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 9, Ahmedabad, directing that opponents herein-original accused Nos. 1 and 2 charged for offences under Sections 302, 337, 324 426 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code be released on bail. The impugned order was passed below an application for bail which was submitted on July 1, 1983 by the accused. Misc. Criminal Application No. 1513 of 1983 has been filed by the State of Gujarat while Misc. Criminal Application No. 1363 of 1983 has been filed by the original informant Smt. Prakash Kaur, widow of Ajitsing Harnamsing. In both the applications it is prayed that the order passed by the trial Court granting bail be cancelled.2. It is neither necessary nor it is advisable to go into the minute details of prosecution case at this stage. As per the F.I.R. given by the widow of the deceased victim Ajitsing Harnamsing within about four hours' time aft...
Tag this Judgment!Anil K. Patel and anr. Vs. Anand Municipalty and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-18-1983
Reported in: (1984)1GLR645
P.D. Desai, Actg. C.J.1. The petitioners are the employees of the first respondent Municipality. The first petitioner is occupying the post of Octroi Clerk since 1975. The second petitioner is occupying the post of Hydraulic Engineer since 1973. The first and the second petitioners were at the material time elected members of the Board of Directors of two Societies registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). They were elected as Directors of Anand Peoples Co-operative Bank Ltd. in or about August 1981. They were also elected as Directors of the Anand Dudh Vaparnari Madhyastha Grahak Sahakari Mandali Ltd. in or about September, 1981. The second petitioner was also at the material time an elected Director of the Anand Industrial Estate Co-operative Society Ltd. It would thus appear that the petitioners, while in the employment of the respondent-Municipality, were taking active interest in the Co-operative movement and that they we...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Zenith Silk Mills
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1983
Reported in: AIR1985Guj90
ORDER1. What should be the approach of court in passing interim order in matters where the imposition and recovery of tax is challenged by a litigant? Can the court be oblivious of the socio-economic consequences of its orders? How, and by taking into consideration which factors the question as to 'prima facie case' and 'balance of convenience' should be decided? These are some of the questions which have arisen in this petition filed by the Union of India under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the legality and validity of an ex parte injunction order dated January 31, 1983 passed by the Civil Judge (SD), Surat.2. Respondent No.1-original plaintiff is a Company having its office and factory at Surat. ('respondent-Company', for short). The respondent-Company imported certain manmade fibre filament yarn which was subject to custom duty. On the goods imported in India, the custom duty was leviable at the relevant time as mentioned in Schedule I to the Custom Tariff Act, 1975. T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »