Gujarat Court November 1984 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Rajat Hirabhai Motibhai and ors. Vs. Deputy Collector, Land Acquisitio ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-14-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Guj170; (1985)1GLR275
P.S. Poti, C.J.1. Rule. Shri M. I. Hava waives service of the Rule for the respondents. It is agreed that the matter may be heard and disposed of forthwith and accordingly it is heard.2. The complaint of the petitioners in this case is that though they are said to be parties to an award, they have no notice of the award itself and, therefore, they had i necessarily to seek copies of the award for the purpose of filing reference applications under the Land Acquisition Act. That they have been supplied with intimation of the passing of the award and not with the essential contents of the award is not a matter in controversy. If there is obligation to serve on a party a copy of the award or a substance of the award which will enable the party to know the decision as well as the reasons supporting such decision so as, to enable him to file a reference application, such a notice has not been served is not again in controversy. 3. The question, therefore, is whether under S. 12(2) of the Lan...
Mrs. J.S. Pandya Vs. Director General of Police and Inspector General ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-14-1984
Reported in: (1985)1GLR277
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. The petitioner herein joined the service on 3rd September, 1973 as a Junior Clerk in the office of the Inspector General of Police. The petitioner was promoted as a Senior Clerk by the order dated 31st August 1984 and was posted in the office of the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City. On the very next day, i.e. on 1st September 1984, she was transferred as a Senior Clerk to the office of Special Inspector General of Police, C.I.D. (Intelligence) Ahmedabad. However, the Director of Finger Print, Ahmedabad, did not relieve her to join her promotional post as Senior Clerk on the ground that there was a departmental inquiry pending against her. The petitioner challenges the act of the department in preventing her from joining her promotional post. By an earlier order of this court, interim relief was granted on condition that she proceeded on leave. She continues to be on leave till this date.2. Mr. H.L. Patel, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that it i...
In Re: Navjivan Mills Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-13-1984
Reported in: [1986]59CompCas201(Guj)
B.K. Mehta, J.1. The applicant company has taken out this summons for directions by this court under section 536(2) of the Companies Act, 1956, in the matter of financial arrangement between the applicant company on the one hand and the Industrial Development Bank of india, the Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Ltd., the Industrial Finance Corporation of India, the Industrial Reconstruction Corporation of India Ltd. and the Bank of India on the other, so as to ensure the said financing agencies that the dispositions of the proper ties in the favour may not be avoided in future also for the direction that not payment of any moneys which may be effects by the company at any time between the presenting of winding up petitions which have been stayed and the date of the order of winding up, if at all made on one or more of such of the petitions and no disposition of any property or assets which may be effected by the company during the aforesaid period in favour of any p...
Vijay Champaklal Shah Vs. Addl. Secy. to Govt. of India, Ministry of F ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-13-1984
Reported in: 1986CriLJ82; (1985)2GLR974
N.H. Bhatt, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ of Habeas Corpus seeking quashing of the detention order of the petitioner one Vijay. This matter was heard almost for the full day yesterday and to us it appeared that Mr. Kapadia the learned Counsel had finished his arguments to a substantial extent, if not wholly. Today even at 11.15 a.m. Mr. Kapadia is not present and, therefore, we are constrained to proceed to dictating our judgment.2. The detention order, Annexure A D/- 28-6-84, has been passed by the Additional Secretary to the Government of India, who ordered to detain the petitioner 'with a view to preventing him from dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled goods'. The grounds of detention bearing the same date are to be found at Annexure B. It was alleged in the grounds that on information received on 23-7-83 from the Collector of Customs, Ahmedabad, the Customs Officers of Surat...
Ambalal Ranchhodlal Patel Vs. Bhikhabhai Punjabhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-13-1984
Reported in: (1985)2GLR941
M.B. Shah, J.1. A criminal complaint was filed by the Secretary of Society called 'Lamba Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd.' against the petitioner who was serving as a Clerk in the said Society contending that the petitioner has misappropiated an amount of Rs. 19,296-92 P. as there was shortage of stock for an amount of Rs. 14,907/- and cash balance for sale of the goods worth Rs. 4389-92 P. was not deposited by him with the said Society. The said complaint was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code by the learned Magistrate. The investigating officer thereafter submitted a chargesheet against the petitioner. After examining certain witnesses the prosecution declared that it does not want to examine any more witnesses and its evidence be treated as having been closed. On 30th May 1984 the petitioner filed an application Ex. 182 before the Court contending that persons who had purchased the goods from the Society during the period between 9-10-80 and 26-10-80 ...
Balkrishna Chatrabhuj Thacker and ors. Vs. Devabai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-09-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Guj133; (1985)1GLR321
1. This Second Appeal is filed by the original Plaintiffs (original mortgagors) against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Kutch at Bhuj in Regular Civil Appeal No. 91 of 1974 whereby he dismissed. The appeal of the original mortgagee but did not grant the relief of actual possession of the suit premises which were in possession of the tenant.2. The facts leading to the filing of this Second Appeal may be briefly stated as follows: -One Jethalal Valji mortgaged with possession the suit property with one Hansraj Devkaran for 15000 Kories under the mortgage-deed of Maha Vad Amas 1995 corresponding to 19th Feb. 1939. The heirs of the said Jethalal filed a suit for redemption of the suit property from mortgage against the heirs of the original mortgagee as also persons in possession of the suit premises who were tenants inducted by the original mortgagee. The said suit being Regular Civil Suit No. 34 of 1971 was heard by the teamed Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division at ...
Chanchalgauri Ramanlal and ors. Vs. Narendrakumar Chandulal and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Guj55; (1985)1GLR359
P.S. Poti, C.J.1. A simple but interesting question arises for decision in this appeal. The controversy concerns the maintainability of a cross- objection in an appeal, which is found to be not maintainable in law. Though cases have arisen where the controversy concerned the maintainability of a cross-objection in an appeal dismissed for non-payment of sufficient Court-fee or in an appeal filed out of time, a case such as the one before us has no precedent in law. The case here is one where an appeal in which the cross-objection was filed was obviously not maintainable in law and the appellants, accordingly, did not press the appeal. The appeal arose out of a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from selling, transferring or dealing with suit plot, which, according to them was co-ownership property. The suit was dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties. The defendants had, therefore, necessarily no Cause for grievance as there was no decree against them and th...
Jayant Vrajlal Ajmera and anr. Vs. Jayantkumar Motichand Doshi and ors ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: AIR1986Guj10; (1985)2GLR102
B.K. Mehta, J.1. Since we are not inclined to grant leave to the applicants herein for preferring Letters Patent Appeal against the order of the learned single Judge (Coram: A. M Ahmadi, J.) dated September 24, 1984, in Civil Revision Application No. 808 of 1984 directing, inter alia, the respondent No. 1 to convene a meeting of the Sthanakvasi Jain Mota Sangh of Rajkot latest by the end of October, 1984, after giving a fortnight's notice of the meeting to the members concerned by public advertisement in the newspaper, a few relevant facts need be noticed in order to appreciate the reliefs which have been claimed by the applicants in the present civil application, before we state our reasons in support of our view.2. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are the President and Secretary respectively of the said Sangh. It appears that by letter of December 24, 1981, some members of the Sangh served a requisition on respondent No.1 for calling a meeting of the Sangh and the items of the agenda for the...
Gopal T. Madnani Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-07-1984
Reported in: (1985)1GLR490
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. The petitioner herein was appointed as a Junior Clerk on and from 9th March 1962 in the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Rajkot Range, Rajkot. Subsequently he was continued on the same post by an order dated 28th May 1962. The petitioner together with other Junior Clerks was discharged from service by the order dated 27th November 1968 on the ground that he and other Junior Clerks had failed to pass the S.S.D,. Examination within the specified period of four years. On the representations made by the Junior Clerks in police and other departments, the Government of Gujarat rein-stated the petitioner and other Junior Clerks in service on condition that they pass the S.S.D. Examinations to be held immediately after their reinstatment. It is petitioner's case that he passed the examination in June 1976. Even after the reinstatement, there was a question with regard to the break in service which lasted for nearly four years. After giving due thought to the...
Kantibhai Jivabhai Chauhan and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Nov-06-1984
Reported in: (1985)1GLR339
M.B. Shah1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 18-7-84 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 209 of 1984 rejecting their application for bail under Section 167(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners have preferred this application.2. The petitioners were arrested on 3rd April 1984 for causing murder of one Kantibhai Becharbhai. They were produced before the Judicial Magistrate on 4th April 1984. From 4th April 1984 they are in judicial custody. The investigating officer submitted charge-sheet on 3rd July 1984. 1st July 1984 was Sunday and 2nd July 1984 was declared as public holiday by the State Government on account of death of Shri Ravishanker Maharaj. The petitioners filed an application on 12th July 1984 before the learned Sessions Judge, Kaira at Nadiad, for releasing them on bail on the ground that charge-sheet was not submitted within 90 days as 90 days were over on 2nd July 1984 an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›