Gujarat Court July 1985 Judgments
Bhavnagar District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Government of Gujarat an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-15-1985
Reported in: [1987]61CompCas326(Guj); (1985)2GLR1380
N.H. Bhatt, J. 1. These four matters involving a common question of interpretation of section 161 of the Gujarat Co-operative Society Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity), can be conveniently dealt with and disposed of by this common judgment, and we are happy to note that Mr. Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the four petitioners in the four matters, and Mr. M. I. Hawa appearing for the State Government and the Registrar, common respondents in these four matters, have agreed to this common treatment. 2. In order to understand the controversies, more or less common, in these four matters, a few facts are required to be noted with precision and clarity. Various co-operative societies are existing in Bhavnagar District. In respect of these various societies, liquidation proceedings had come to be initiated by the Registrar under section 107 of the Act because he was of the opinion that those societies ought to be wound up. Interim orders were passed...
Tag this Judgment!Janakkumar Manubhai Shukla Vs. A. Myanger, District Development Office ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-15-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR121; (1986)ILLJ531Guj
1. The petitioner herein joined service as Junior Clerk on 7th October, 1971 in the service of the respondent Panchayat. He worked as Steno-typist from 23rd July, 1972 to 31st March, 1973. On 1st April, 1973, he was appointed as Stenographer Grade-II for six months, which period was subsequently extended upon the time a permanent incumbent could be appointed. The Panchayat Service Selection Committee called for a report about the performance of the petitioner which was submitted on 10th October, 1975. According to the petitioner, his performance was quite satisfactory and that he was eligible to continue on the said post. By the circular dated 23rd February, 1978, the Government imposed the requirement of continuation in Panchayat service, whereby the employees had to pass the departmental examination in the specified number of attempts. The petitioner was granted permission to appear in the examination to be held on 16th June, 1978. He could not appear in the said examination on the g...
Tag this Judgment!Kulsum and ors. Vs. Ismailbhai Mohmedbhai Malek and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-15-1985
Reported in: 2(1985)ACC449
R.J. Shah, J.1. This appeal arises at the instance of the original applicants and out of an award dated 31st August 1976 passed by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Nadiad in Motor Accidents claims Petition No. 12 of 1976.2. An accident had taken place on or about 21st December 1974 wherein the husband of claimsant No. 2 was injured and he expired as a result of the injuries received in the said accident on 23rd December 1974. The appellants are the widow of the deceased, his minor children and the mother of the deceased.3. The deceased was working as a conductor on a truck driven by opponent No. I in the course of his employment under opponent No. 2. The said truck was insured with opponent No. 3. When the said truck was proceeding from Kayath to Patehpura, the same was driven rashly and negligently as a result of which the deceased was thrown out overboard, received injuries and ultimately expired as aforesaid. The claims preferred was in the total sum of Rs. 50.000/-. The Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Maniben D/O. Mithalal Parmar and W/O. Gopalbhai Vs. Gopalbhai Punjabha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR385
J.P. Desai, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the learned Assistant Judge Panchmahals at Godhra in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 14 of 1982.Looking to the provisions of Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 and Sections 8 and 26 of the Bombay Civil Courts Act, 1869, it is clear that the appeal will lie to the District Court and not to this Court. Such a view has been taken by this Court in First Appeal No. 1603 of 1983 decided on 24-2-1984, First Appeal No. 1802 of 1984 decided on 5-2-1985 and First Appeal No. 1125 of 1983 decided on 20-6-1985. The Memo of Appeal is, therefore, required to be returned to the appellant for presentation to proper Court. It is, therefore, directed that the Memo of Appeal along with the certified copies of the judgment and decree be returned to the appellant for presentation to proper Court. The appellant is given time upto 26-7-1985 to present the appeal before the appropriate District Court.2. It may be mentioned here th...
Tag this Judgment!Meenaben Dhurabhai Rathod (Minor) by Her Guardian Next Friend Duhrabha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1985
Reported in: 1(1986)ACC56
D.C. Gheewala, J.1. Minor petitioner, who bad sustained injuries in a Motor Accident and who was awarded compensation, has filed this appeal for getting enhanced compensation. Due to the good offices of the learned Advocates appearing for both the sides and because of the constructive approach adopted by them respondent No. 2 Insurance Company has agreed to pay Rs. 5,000/- more and the appellant-claimant has agreed to accept the same in full and final settlement. Mr. Marshal, the learned Advocate appearing for the Minor petitioner has certified that this settlement is in the best interest of the minor and we also feel that looking to the total amount of compensation which shall be had by the Minor the settlement is in the best interest of the Minor. Under these circumstances, the additional amount of Rs. 5,000/-shall be paid by the respondent No. 2 within six weeks before the trial court and on this stipulation the appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn. Notice discharged. No order as ...
Tag this Judgment!Pushpaben Gopalji Vs. Kanakkumar Amratlal Mehta
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1985
Reported in: (1985)2GLR1427
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. In this revision application under Section 115 of the ,Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner-wife has made a grievance regarding the order passed by the learned District Judge, Kutch at Bhuj below application ex, 58 in H.M.P. No. 187 of 1978. By that order, the petitioner's application for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('the Act' for short) came to be rejected by the learned trial Judge. A few facts leading to this application are required to be noted at the outset to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner.2. The petitioner's case is that she is lawfully married wife of the respondent. That the respondent has large economic resources and he is a big businessman carrying on diverse businesses in Kutch district. The respondent has filed Marriage Petition No. 187 of 1978 in the court of the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) at Bhuj. It appears that thereafter the petition was renumbered as HMP No. 4 of 1980 and was placed for dispo...
Tag this Judgment!Bharatkumar Thakordas Manjarwala and ors. Vs. Gujarat Electricity Boar ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-11-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR291
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioners are occupying some land buildings constructed thereon in the sim of village Vadod which is situated within urban agglomeration area of Surat. The petitioners appear to have installed power looms in such buildings. The petitioners pray that the respondent Electricity Board be directed to give electricity connection to them. It is contended that they have put up construction on the land owned and occupied by them after obtaining necessary permission from the Grant Panchayat concerned. Moreover, the ownors and occupiers of plot No. 1 of the same survey number and plot No. 5 of survey No. 99 are also given electricity connection by the Board. They are similarly situated and, therefore, the Board being 'State' cannot deny the equal treatment to the petitioners.2. It is made clear in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Board that as far as the owners and, occupiers of plot No. 1 of the same survey number and that of plot No. 5 of survey No. 99 are ...
Tag this Judgment!Nitaben Popatlal Shah Vs. Rameshkumar Vadilal Shah and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-11-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR544
D.C. Gheewala, J.1. The wife, who had the misfortune of seeing that her matrimonial life had gone to rocks and who had applied to the tears Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Surendranagar under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to get maintenance had also the misfortune of seeing that the application was rejected and when carried before the learned Sessions Judge at Surendranagar it met the same fate, has filed this Special Criminal Application. The spouses were married some two and a half years before the application was filed in 1983. The wife was staying at Surendranagar and the husband was staying at Botad. In the application the averments are made to the effect that she was subjected to physical and mental torture and that she was not liked by her husband. She has further averred in the petition that she has been driven out and the husband is earning Rs. 2,000/- per month. She has claimed Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance.2. The respondent-husband had resisted the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Naran Anappa Sheti Vs. Jayantilal Chunilal Sahah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-1985
Reported in: AIR1987Guj205; (1986)1GLR206
ORDER1. Is there any virtue in insisting upon the strict compliance of procedure requirement against the considerations of substantial justice The question has arisen in the background of almost unending struggle between a landlord and a tenant.The petitioner is a tenant against whom ,the respondent-landlord filed Civil Suit No. 460 of 1979 in the Court of Civil Judge (SD), Narol. The respondent-landlord filed the suit for eviction of suit premises which consist of two rooms. The premises are situated in Odhav locality of city of Ahmedabad. The rent of the suit premises is Rs. 57/- per month plus other taxes. The respondent-landlord alleged that the petitioner was in arrears of rent from December 12, 1978 till July 21, 1979. It was also alleged that the petitioner-tenant had not paid the taxes. The suit was filed on the ground that the petitioner-tenant was not ready and willing to pay the rent. Though a notice demanding the arrears of rent was served upon him, he neglected to pay the ...
Tag this Judgment!Sayed YasIn Sayed Mohmad Vs. Bai Chani D/O. Harilal Ved and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR117
R.A. Mehta, J.1. The following substantial questions of law have been formulated by me court at the time of admission of this Second Appeal:I. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the lower appellate court has committed a substantial error of law in treating the decision of the Tenancy authority that the respondent-detendant had become the deemed purchaser of the land though admittedly the provisions of the Tenancy Act were not applicable to the lands in question since they are within the limits of Surat Municipal Corporation?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the lower appellate court committed substantial error of law in holding that the relevant provisions of the Tenancy Act, inter alia that contained in Section 32G apply to the lands in question by virtue of Section 31 of the Gujarat Devasthan Inam Abolition Act, 1969?3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the lower appellate court, therefore, consequently committed substantial err...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »