Gujarat Court August 1985 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.
Bai Chanchal D/O. Patel Ranchhodbhai Jhaverbhai Vs. Motibhai Jhaverbha ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR216
R.A. Mehta, J.1. At the time of admission of this Second Appeal the following substantial question of law was framed:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant's father and/or the appellant became owner of the suit property by adverse possession?2. The appellant is the original plaintiff and the following is the pedigree showing the relationship of the parties:Shambhubhai-------------|Jhaverbhai---------------------------------| | |Ranchhod Motibhai Shankarbhai(died in D-11966)|--------------------------| | | Chanchal Dhulabhai Ramabhai(Plaintiff D-2 D-3Appellant)The suit property is agricultural land Section No. 358 admeasuring a Acre and 34 Gunthas in village Shili. It is the case of the appellant-plaintiff that her grandfather Jhaverbhai was the original owner of the suit field and after his demise the said land had come to be given to her father Ranchhod on 6th May 1949 and ever since then her father and after his death, she the plaintiff, had been in ...
Saiyad Mohamad Baker El-edroos (Decd.) Through His Heir and Lrs. Sajja ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR295
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. This letters Patent Appeal is against the order passed by the learned Single Judge of our High Court wherein the learned single Judge has summarily dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein, originally, an application was filed before the Charity Commissioner and he has initiated the scheme proceedings No. 5 of 1973 under Section 50-A of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The said proceedings are still pending before the Charity Commissioner. On 23rd January 1979, original applicant No. 2 Hasan Bin Abubaker died. Since nobody had action to prosecute the matter, the son of the original applicant No. 2, Abdul Habib Bin Hasan, gave application Ex. 44 on 11th October 1983 to be joined as a party to the said proceedings on the ground that he is interested in the said trust. On the same day, another person, Hussain bin Avadhbhai, claimed to be one of the trustees of Hazarat Chhota Edroos Masjid and Durgah Trust and also as a person interested in the Haza...
Kasam Ibrahim HusseIn Bathia and anr. Vs. Project Manager, Oil and Nat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-1985
Reported in: (1986)1GLR526
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. The petitioners herein have come forward with this Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of an appropriate writ, direction 91 Order directing the respondents to take appropriate steps under the provision of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission Act, 1959 (No. 43 of 1959) read with the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to acquire Survey No. 449 of Panoli belonging to the petitioners and to direct them to pay compensation as determined under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. It is further prayed by the petitioners that respondents may be directed to pay the outstanding compensation and rent as per panchnama to the petitioners herein.2. It is the case of the petitioners that on or about 2nd October 1980, the respondents entered into their land measuring 5 Acres 1 Guntha for drilling operations and also for providing quarters to the workers of such drilling operations. The petitioners further submit that the lands ha...
Vishnu B. Seernani Vs. Government of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-09-1985
Reported in: 1987(13)ECC245; 1987(11)LC121(Gujarat); 1987(27)ELT266(Guj); (1986)2GLR1059
Bhat, J.1. This is a petition by an entrepreneur who, because of the unreasonable attitude adopted by the public authorities has come to suffer considerably and perhaps beyond repairs. 2. In order to known how the above remark is justified, we would set out the facts that would show the extremely unreasonable and untenable stand adopted by the Customs authorities. The petitioner had established a factory to manufacture clothes for the purpose of export. It was in the Kandla Free Trade Zone (hereinafter referred to as KFTZ for brevity's sake). The policy of the Government is to allow import of duty-free goods to such people for the purpose of export. The petitioner had started his factory, had imported goods time and again. In the year 1969 when his factory was going on, he had imported two consignments - one of 39 cases and another of 9 cases - which were landed at Bombay. They were to be transhipped to Kandla and road transport was permitted. When the goods reached Kandla, the authori...
Madhusudan Vegetable Products Co. Ltd. Vs. Rupa Chemicals, Vapi and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Guj156; (1986)1GLR101
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. In this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellant, original plaintiff, of Civil Suit No. I of 1985 in the District Court of Panchmahals at Godhra has brought in challenge the judgment and order of learned single Judge of this Court, M. B. Shah, J. in Appeal from Order which was dismissed by the learned single Judge of this Court in exercise of his powers under O. 43. R. 1 of the Civil P.C., 1908. The appellant-plaintiff had moved an interim injunction application Ex. 5 under O. 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with S. 151 of the Civil P.C. praying for interim injunction pending the suit against the respondents-defendants. After hearing the concerned parties, the learned Joint District Judge of Panchmahals at Godhra dismissed the application Ex. 5 for interim injunction and vacated the ad interim relief. Being aggrieved by the said order of the learned trial Judge, the appellant preferred Appeal from Order as miscellaneous appeal under O. 43, R...
Kalavatiben Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-1985
Reported in: 2(1985)ACC433
A.M. Ahmedi, J.1.Mr. B.B. Shah, the learned advocate for the appellant, seeks leave to restrict the claims in appeal to Rs. 5,000/-. Leave granted. Memo of appeal to be amended accordingly.2. Appeal is admitted. Printing and paper book dispensed with Mr. M.D. Pandya waives notice on behalf of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation on behalf of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation. By consent the appeal is heard today.3. Mr. Shah, the learned advocate for the appellant, challenges the award on the ground that the compensation awarded under the head 'pain, shock and suffering' is grossly inadequate. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- under this head. We find from the evidence on record that the injured, aged about 33 years, had suffered an injury on the left thigh as a result whereof, she experienced difficulty in equating and sitting cross legged. There was. a fracture of the shaft of the left femur with a punctured wound and a fracture of superior public ramus. She wa...
Nalinikant J. Baxi Vs. Chairman and Managing Director Bank of India an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-07-1985
Reported in: (1987)ILLJ388Guj
ORDER1. In this very matter while passing the interim order on Dec. 30, 1983, I had inter alia observed that it was not understandable as to why the authorities of public sector undertakings should not adopt an approach of justice and fair-play with their employees and further observed : 'They must forget the ethos and attitude of private sector management. The employment in public sector undertakings is the wealth of the nation at large. The bureaucrats managing the affairs of the public sector undertakings have to forget and forsake the principles of management of undertakings on capitalist exploitative principles. They are not supposed to vie with the managers of private sector establishments. They are supposed to remove the evils of capitalism and not to perpetuate the same. They are supposed to act within the leash as envisaged in the Constitution.' One feels sorry that the aforesaid remarks still remain justified when the final decision is being rendered in this matter. 2. At the...
In Re: Prakash Navnitbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-05-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Guj116; (1986)2GLR1041
ORDER1. Alas: The petitioner who has otherwise become major (of 18 years) is required to be told to wait till he attains majority which in the facts and circumstances of the case, he will attain when be completes 21 years of age.2. In Misc. Petn. No. 4 of 1979 (a guardianship petition) decided on Oct. 15, 1979, it was prayed that the immoveable property belonging to the joint family in which the minors had interest be permitted to be sold. The court inquired into the matter and in that matter guardian ad litem was also appointed. After necessary investigation, the Court (Coram : B. J. Divan, C. J. as he then was) passed the following order on Oct. 15, 1979.'In view of the material produced from the valuer's report, it is clear Rs. 155/- per square metre is a ' reasonable price in respect of the property which is being sold, under these circumstances, sale is sanctioned as being forthe benefit of the minor. Petitioners are put on condition of depositing the amounts mentioned in the penu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›