Gujarat Court April 1984 Judgments
Jethalal Raghunath and anr. Vs. K.H. Sojitra
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Guj87
Bhatt, J.1. this is a revision application referred to us by our Brother R. A. Mehta J. by his, order dt. 21-2-1984.2. In order to understand what the controversy is, the history of this litigation is required to be looked at. The opponent herein, who admittedly is a tenant of the premises situated at Jamnagar, has filed an application for fixation of standard rent in respect of the premises hired by him from the present petitioners-landlords. He has a right to file an application and there is no controversy about it. In that substantive application itself, the opponent-tenant filed an application for fixation of interim rent, presumably under S. 11(3) of the Bombay Rent Act. The learned trial Judge fixed the interim rent of Rs. 1575/- p.m. as against the contractual rent of K 2500/_Soon on being served with this order fixing the interim rent, the landlords appeared before the learned Judge and gave him an application, ex. 32, requesting the learned Judge that the said order fixing the...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and anr. Vs. Narayanbhai Keshavlal Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-26-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Guj206
1. Appellant I is the Union of India, and appellant 2 is the General Manager (Telephones), Ahmedabad. They are the original defendants in Civil Suit No.608 of 1984 filed by the present respondent in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad.2. Present respondent Narayannbhai Keshavlal Patel is the subscriber of two telephone connections, viz. Nos. 67869 at his residence and 68223 at his shop. He received a notice D/- 6-2-1984 under Rule 421 of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') from the respondents, intimating him that both his telephones would be disconnected on the expiry of seven days. The said notice did not contain any reason for the alleged disconnection.3. On receipt of the said notice, the respondent-plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit. Along with the said suit, he also took out a Notice of Motion for an injunction to restrain the defendants from disconnecting the said telephones. The notice regarding the hearing of the said Notice of Motion was serv...
Tag this Judgment!Ramjibhai Lalbhai Patel Vs. Shantaben
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1984Guj167
1. The appellant. Ramjibhai Lalbhai Patel of Talod Taluka Prantij. District Sabarkantha. is the husband of the respondent Smt. Shantaben. daughter of Manilal Kashkanbhai Patel; The appellant had filed H. M. P. No. 18/ 79 in the Court of the Civil judge (S-D). Ahmedabad (Rural) at Nerol under: Sec 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 as amended by Act No. 68 of 1976. to obtain a decree of divorce of his marriage with the respondent on the ground that she had deserted him for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. The perusal of the Rajnama discloses that on 19-9-1980 the record and proceedings were transferred from the Court of the Civil Judge (S. D.). Narol to the Extra Assistant Judge Narol under the orders of the District Judge. The matter was there after conducted and decided by the Extra Assistant Judge. Narol who by his judgment and order dated 17-8-1981 dismissed the petition with costs. Hence, the appellant has p...
Tag this Judgment!Setu Madhavrao Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Guj27
1. This appeal from Order is filed by the appellant who is the original plaintiff and who has constructed a theatre in the name of I-alit Mahal at Kaligam, Sabarmad, Ahmedabad.2. The case of the appellant-plaintiff, in short, was that he had purchased 3, 025 square yards of land out of the land bearing survey No. 256, situated in the Sim of village Ranip, from one Prabhudas Keshavdas Patel, for the purpose of constructing a cinema theatre. Before constructing the said cinema theatre, the plaintiff had applied for 'No Objection certificate and, therefore, the public notice was erti issued by the Commissioner of Police in the newspaper. Thereafter, 'No objection' certificate was granted to the appellant plaintiff, and the said land was also allowed to be converted into non-agricultural use. When the theatre was ready, the plaintiff applied for electric connection from the Electricity Company, as well as for supply of water connection from the Municipality. When the electricity Company's ...
Tag this Judgment!Sukar Naran Bakhia Vs. R.P. Shah and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-25-1984
Reported in: (1985)1GLR127
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. The present petitioner has filed this application for enlarging him on bail during the pendency of the trial. The petitioner had filed several similar applications for Bail before this Court which have been rejected after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case. The first point urged by Mr. H.H. Advani, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that it is open to the accused person to file successive applications for bail one after the other on the same facts and circumstances and that each application has to be heard on merits irrespective of the result, of the previous application. This contention of Mr. Advani is contested by Mr. H.M. Mehta, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 stating that while it is open to the petitioner to file successive applications for granting of bail, according to him, normally the court would not entertain a subsequent application unless the petitioner points out any new facts and circumstances that may have come...
Tag this Judgment!Digvijay B. Majumdar Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-23-1984
Reported in: (1984)2GLR1528; (1985)ILLJ303Guj
1. In this Second Appeal the important question of law that arises for consideration is whether compulsory retirement on the ground of physical incapacity amounts to removal 2. The appellant (original plaintiff) was admittedly a permanent employee holding substantive post in the Western Railway. During the tenure of his service, in the year 1972 he developed an eye trouble resulting into detachment of retina of one eye, and in another eye he had a cataract. The officers of Railway finding him unfit even for 'C' category service, removed him from service by an order of compulsory retirement without holding any inquiry or without affording to the appellant-plaintiff any opportunity to show cause. The question, therefore, is whether the plaintiff's compulsory retirement from service amounts to removal from service within the meaning of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution of India, or whether the same is in contravention of the principles of natural justice, on the basis of the relevant statut...
Tag this Judgment!A. Vs. B.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-23-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Guj121; (1985)1GLR119
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, at Bhavnagar in Regular Civil Appeal No. 37 of 1981, which in turn was directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhavnagar in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 1/76. The appellant-wife had filed a petition against the respondent-husband for obtaining divorce on the ground of physical and mental cruelty. She alleged that the parties were married according to the Hindu rites on 24-1-1971 at Bhavnagar; that after the marrige she stayed with the respondent at his residence in Bombay up to 6-12-1973. Thereafter she returned to her parental home at Bhavnagar, where she gave birth to a male child on 8-7-1974. She had inter alia contended that the respondent husband was behaving towards her in a cruel and wanton way; that she was subjected to great harassment and insult and that the respondent-husband had also inflicted mental cruelty by al...
Tag this Judgment!Arjanbhai Bhikhabhai Vs. Babusing Ramsing and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-20-1984
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas598(Guj)
Bhatt, J. 1. This is an appeal by the original claimant of the Motor Accidents Claims Petition No. 40 of 1979 decided by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Bhavnagar. The applicant-appellant who was a working at the relevant time, i.e., December 11, 1978, as a labourer on the truck No. GTD 5252 driven by respondent No. 1 and belonging to respondent No. 2 had come to sustain injuries when the truck was playing between Tajpur and Lathidad in Bhavnagar District. When Lathidad was about a kilometre away from the place of the unfortunate accident, the driver got the axle between the front wheels broken by his unduly fast and rash driving, with the result that the petitioner-appellant who was sitting in the body of the truck got a violent jerk with the result that the spare-wheel also jumped and violently fell on his back causing serious injuries to him. He had, therefore, filed the claim petition for Rs. 70,000 in all under various heads detailed by him in his application. The l...
Tag this Judgment!Siemens India Limited Vs. the State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-20-1984
Reported in: (1984)2GLR929(GJ); [1984]57STC1(Guj)
Poti, C.J. 1. The Gujarat Sales Tax Tribunal has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this Court under section 69 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that though pumps and pumping sets in question are agricultural machinery and implements exclusively used in the agricultural operations, they are covered by not entry 5 but entry 36 of Schedule II-Part A to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in interpreting the term 'exclusively' used in entry 5 in Schedule II-Part A to the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, and to hold that in order to see whether the water pumps and water pumping sets are 'exclusively' used in agricultural operations, one has to see the ordinary or common use and not possible use ?' 2. It is agreed that the first of these questions takes care of the second question also and ...
Tag this Judgment!B.M. Darji Vs. Biharilal Karulal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-20-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1627
P.S. Poti, C.J.1. By an order made on 31.1.1984 our learned brothers Talati and Desai, JJ. have referred the following question to be answered by the Full Bench:Whether it is necessary for the Food Inspector to lead evidence that the formalin which he added had 40 per cent strength or whether his assertion as regards the strength based on the lable pasted on the bottle by a pharmaceutical concern would be sufficient for the purpose?2. This question arises under the following circumstances. Both these appeals are by the Food Inspector of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. The Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad, acquitted the accused in the two cases, setting aside the conviction of the accused in each of the cases basing his decision in support of such acquittal on certain observations made in a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court delivered on 17.2.1969 in Criminal Appeal No. 752 of 1967. In that case when the Food Inspector deposed as a witness he was cross-examined as to h...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »