Gujarat Court August 1985 Judgments
National Insurance Co. Vs. Hematsinh Nanbha Saarvaiya and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1985
Reported in: [1988]64CompCas86(Guj)
Shah, J. 1. The insurance company has filed this group of first appeals which arise out of the common judgment and order dated October 21,1978, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rajkot District at Rajkot, in various claim petition filed by the claimants. In first Appeals Nos. 1047 of 1060 of 1979 and 1066 of 19798, the claimants have filed cross-objections for enhancement of the compensation. At the time of hearing of these appeals, the learned advocate for the claimants has submitted that he may be permitted to reduce the claim in the cross-objections. The permission is granted and he has reduced the claim in the aforesaid cross-abjections to Rs. 8,000. 2. These claim petition arise out of an accident which took place on June 12, 1977, at about 3-30 p.m. on Upleta Probandar Highway near village Morkhand between private bus no.GTK 3148 and S.T. bus No. GTE 3084. For the marriage of one Gandalal Nathabhai Gajera, a private luxury bus No. GTX 3148 was hired and the marriage ...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Company Vs. Rajendra Hematsinh and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-30-1985
Reported in: 2(1985)ACC494
M.D. Shah, J.1. The Insurance Company has filed this group of First Appeals which arise out of the common Judgment and order dated 21st 'October 1978 passed by the motor accidents claims Tribunal, Rajkot District at Rajkot in various claims petitions filed by the claimants. In First Appeals Nos. 1047/79, 1050/79 and 1066/79 the claimants have filed cross-objections for enhancement of the compensation. At the time of hearing of taese appeals, the learned advocate for the claimants has submitted that he may be permitted to redice the claims in the cross-objections. The permission is granted and he has reduced the claims in the aforesaid cross-objections at Rs. 8,000/-.2. These claims petitions arise out of the accident which took place on 12-5-1977 at about 3-30 p.m. oa Uplete-Porbandar Highway near village Morkheda between the private bus No. GTX 3148 and S.T. bus No. GTE 3984. For the marriage of Gandalal Nathabhai Gajera a private luxury bus No. GTX 3148 was hired and the marrige part...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhlal Devram Patel Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-29-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR522
A.P. Ravani, J.1. If a subordinate employee is irregular or even of low character, can a superior officer, during duty hours and while on duty, abuse him and threaten to kill him and then claim the protection of Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code? The learned Magistrate says, in the facts and circumstances of the case, that the provisions of Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code are not attracted. Hence this application by the original-accused.2. The petitioner is the original accused in Criminal Case No. 655 of 1984 of the Court of JMFC, Mangrol. The criminal case has been instituted on police report. One police constable Pravinchandra Govindbhai Patel, attached to Kosamba Outpost, filed a complaint against the petitioner-accused, who is Head Constable of Kosamba Outpost, for offence under Sections 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and offences under Section 3 and 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 ('the Act', for short).3. It was alleged that the petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Jaisu and Co. Vs. Meera Agency and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-28-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR334
M.B. Shah, J.1. Opponent No. 1 filed Regular Civil Suit No. 617/85 before the 4th Joint Civil Judge (J.D.) Jamnagar (Shri N.N. Naik.) wherein it was contended that the Port Vadinar is administered by Kandla Port Trust and shipping activities are carried on. Services of a tug for doing various shipping activities of off-shore oil terminal at Vadinar are required. Quotations for hiring of such tug were invited and the plaintiff was given such contract which expired in June 1985. It is his contention that thereafter extension was given for a month. During mat time the Trust invited quotations from various parties by giving an advertisement. The plaintiff had also given his tender amongst other parties. Ultimately the authorities have accepted the tender of the petitioner who is third party to the aforesaid suit. It is the contention of the plaintiff that without hearing him and giving any opportunity his contract was cancelled. He further alleged that some officers of the Trust had given ...
Tag this Judgment!Mehta Parikh and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-1985
Reported in: [1987]163ITR126(Guj)
Ahmadi, J.1. The question refereed for consideration by this court is as under : '1. Whether, on the fact and in the circumstance of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in taking recourse to section 40(c) of the Act when the Department had not disallowed the claim for motorcar expenses under that section 2. Whether, on the fact and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in disallowing the claim of the applicant for motorcar expenses when the applicant is a limited company,irrespective of the fact as to whether some of the cars were including directors (sic) ?' 2. In order to answer these questions, the factual background may be stated as under : 3. The reference concerns the assessment year 1972-73. During the said year, the assessee-company incurred motorcar expenses aggregating to Rs. 32,586. The directors of the company did not own personal cars and hence the Income-tax Officer disallowed a claim of Rs. 4,000 by way of expenditure of non-bu...
Tag this Judgment!Jayantilal Chhaganlal Panchal and ors. Vs. Shirish Shantilal Pandya an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR287
A.P. Ravani, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying that the process issued for the offence under Section 3 of the Copy Rights Act, 1957 by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Narol in Criminal Case No. 545 of 1985 be quashed and set aside. The contention that in view of the provisions of the Copy Rights Act, 1957 no offence whatsoever is disclosed in the complaint, is not required to be gone into at this stage. The trial court on scrutiny of the complaint and on appreciation of evidence and on the basis of the deposition given by the complainant, has thought it fit to issue process under Section 63 of the said Act. Though the complaint was for offence under Section 63 of the Act and also for offences under Sections 405 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the trial court has issued process only under Section 63 of the Act. The contention of the petitioners accused that on proper examination of the provisions of law, there will n...
Tag this Judgment!K.K. Baxi and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-1985
Reported in: (1986)2GLR1008
R.C. Mankad, J.1. Petitioners, Members of Indian Administrative Service ('I.A.S.' for short) have filed this petition challenging the decision of the Central Government determining their seniority in the I.A.S. cadre by assigning them 1973 as their year of allotment. According to the petitioners, petitioner No. 1 K.K. Baxi is entitled to assignment of 1969 as his year of allotment, while petitioner No. 2 C.P. Sampat is entitled to assignment of 1967 as this year of allotment in the I.A.S. cadre.2. In order to appreciate the claims made by the petitioners in this petition, it is necessary to set out in brief the history of service of both the petitioners. K.K. Baxi (hereinafter referred to as 'Baxi') joined service of the erstwhile State of Saurashtra in January 1953 as Accounts Officer (Class I) on being selected by the Saurashtra Public Service Commission. He was promoted as Officer on Special Duty and ex-officio Deputy Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, Finance Department with e...
Tag this Judgment!Gopaldas Becharbhai and anr. Vs. Chandra Prabhaji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-26-1985
Reported in: (1985)2GLR1425
R.A. Mehta, J.1. In this Revision Application by the original defendants the only question that really survives is regarding granting time to pay court fees on the memo of appeal in the District Court.2. The original plaintiff had filed a suit to recover possession of the suit premises on the basis of title and had paid court fees of Rs. 30/-. The suit came to be decreed by the trial court. The defendants in their appeal also paid the same court fees as had been paid by the plaintiff in the trial; court. However, it appears that the Inspecting Officer (Court Fees) had recorded a provisional finding that the court fees on the memo of appeal should have been Rs. 1450/ -and therefore there was deficit fees of Rs. 1420/-. It appears that this was done on the basis of the market value of the suit premises. Ultimately after the inquiry made on the reference the valuation regarding court fees was confirmed. The suit property was found to be of value of Rs. 20.000/- on which the court fee paya...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Bapu Chundaman Patil
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-23-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR196
M.B. Shah, J.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the common judgment and order dated March 29, 1985 passed by the Second Extra Assistant Judge, Vadodara in Civil Misc. Appeals Nos. 85 to 94 and 219 to 237 of 1983 confirming the order of interim injunction dated May 13, 1983 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baroda on Ex. 5 filed by the opponents for interim injunction, the petitioners (defendants) have filed the revision applications.2. The opponents-plaintiffs have filed various suits before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Baroda contending that they were inducted in service as members of Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred as 'CISF') on the promise that they will not be transferred in any other State unless they are promoted to the higher post. It is their say that this arrangement was made in the presence of Mr. J.J. Mehta, Chairman of Indian Petrochemical Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'IPCL') Senior Sergeant Col. N.A. Dave, Sergea...
Tag this Judgment!Rajan Priyadarshi, Dy. Commissioner of Police and ors. Vs. Premilaben ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-23-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR558
D.C. Gheewala, J.1. These petitions are directed against the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 17, in Criminal Case No. 757/ 75 on his file. The opponent No. 1 Premilaben Patel had filed a complaint against the present petitioners. The petitioners were and are serving as Police officers in various cadres. In the said complaint it was inter alia contended that during the antireservation disturbances which were prevalent in the Gujarat State in general and more particularly in Ahmedabad city, during the month of April, four petitioners who were cited as accused bad beaten the complainant and hence she filed a complaint before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 17, for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 325 read with Section 149 of the I.P. Code and 114 of I.P. Code. The said complaint came to be filed on 12-4-1985. Her verification was recorded on the same day and on the same day she gave an application that the accused had tried to...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »