Gujarat Court December 1986 Judgments
Abdul Latif Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1943; (1987)2GLR837
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioner is a detenu, detained under the provisions of Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act as per order dated August 7, 1986. It is an undisputed position that the petitioner was ordered to be externed from Ahmedabad and its contiguous districts under the provisions of Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act and that this externment order is still in operation. The petitioner prays that he be released on parole for a period of fifteen days. Parole is prayed on the ground that he wishes to attend the marriage of his younger sister which is to be held on 27-12-1986.2. It may be noted that parole jurisdiction is evolved by this Court having regard to the pains and sufferings of persons undergoing prolonged period of incarceration on account of long terms of imprisonment. Ordinarily, parole is not meant for persons detained under the provisions of Preventive Detention Laws. By the very nature of detention under the Preventive Detention Laws, a detenu will be kept i...
Tag this Judgment!Raunaq International Ltd. Vs. Ota Kandla Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-23-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Guj213; (1987)1GLR599
ORDER1. This revision application arises out of the order dated 13-1-1983 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhuj on application Exh. 10/D in Civil Suit No. 53 of 1982. The suit is filed by the opponents against the petitioner. It was filed on 14-6-1982. Before that the petitioner had filed Civil Suit No. 230 of 1982 in the High Court of Delhi against the opponents. The summons issued in that suit was served on the opponents and they were directed to appear before the Delhi High Court on 7-4-1982. On that day the opponents did not appear before the Court; and, therefore, the Delhi High Court passed an order for listing the suit before the Court in the category of ,short matters on 16-4-1982 for passing appropriate orders. The petitioner on coming to know about the suit filed in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhuj, have application Exh. 10/D under S. 10 read with S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereafter referred to as 'the Code') requesti...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-23-1986
Reported in: II(1987)ACC80; AIR1988Guj13; (1987)1GLR559
Majmudar, J. 1. In this appeal, a short but interesting question regarding jurisdiction of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal constituted under Section I 10(l) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 to adjudicate the claim for compensation filed against persons other than the driver, owner and insurer of the offending motor vehicle involved in the accident, falls for determination.2. A few facts leading to this appeal can profitably be looked at, at the outset. In a vehicular accident that took place on 4-101974, a bus belonging to the appellant-S.T. Corporation driven by its driver-respondent No. 2 met with an accident at the railway level crossing at 'village Kakosi between Sidhpur and Mathan, in Mehsana district. When the S.T. bus was approaching the railway level crossing, gates on either side were found open and hence, the bus proceeded ahead. At that time, a railway engine was being driven by its driver one Kadar Ismail. It was proceeding from Patan side towards village Kakosi, Water ta...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedabad Shaher Stanik Swaraj Nagarik Samitee, Ahmedabad and anr. Etc ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1986
Reported in: AIR1988Guj39; (1987)2GLR1130
ORDER1. These two petitions by the two unregistered and unrecognised organisations are for allotment of a common symbol for their candidates at the ensuing general election for Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. The petitioner Samiti in Special Civil Application No. 6302 of 1986 has fielded 29 candidates from 16 wards and the petitioner Morcha in the other petition has fielded 19 candidates from 15 wards. In all, there are 127 seats from 43 wards of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation.2. The claim of the petitioners is based on the directions dated 29-1-1985 issued by the Election Commission. It is the common case that there are no rules regarding reservation and allotment of symbols at the Municipal election. However, as per the public notice dated 18-11-1986 issued by the Municipal Corporation (which is published in the newspapers which is at Annex. I to the affidavit-in-reply at page 33, it has been mentioned that the candidates for the ensuring general election will be allotted symbols a...
Tag this Judgment!Vedprakash Devkinandan Chiripal and Etc. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Guj253; (1987)2GLR1345
Gokulakrishnan, C.J. 1. Special Criminal Application No. 427 of 1986 comes up before the Full Bench on a reference made by a Division Bench of our High Court. The petitioner herein is sought to be detained under the provisions of the Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supply of Essential Commodities Act, 1980. On 6-121985, his premises were searched and kerosene tins were seized. On 20-2-1986, a detention order was made under S. 3(l) of the said Act. Since the petitioner was absconding, a notification was issued in the Official Gazette as provided under S. 7(l)(b) of the said Act. This was on 29-3-1986. On 34-1986 this Special Criminal Application was filed wherein the petitioner prayed for quashing the detention order as ab initio void and illegal. There is a further prayer for grant of stay against the execution of the order of detention passed by the second respondent, who is the Deputy Secretary to Government, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Government of Gujarat. ...
Tag this Judgment!C.M. Parikh and ors. Vs. V.M. Mehta and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-01-1986
Reported in: (1987)1GLR362
S.A. Shah, J.1. All these five Letters Patent Appeals involve common questions of law and facts and, therefore, at the request of the Advocates of (he parties they were heard together and are now being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The learned single Judge (N.H. Bhatt, J.) by his common judgment delivered on 20-2-1978 disposed of Special Civil Applications Nos. 1838 of 1973, 1996 of 1976, 1997 of 1974, 2303 of 1974 and 1573 of 1975. Special Civil Application No. 1838 of 1973 was an omnibus petition and, therefore, separate petitions were filed by the respective petitioners individually. No appeal has been filed against the order in the said petition. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order in Special Civil Application No. 1996 of 1974 two Letters Patents Appeals have been filed viz. Letters Patent Appeal No. 39 of 1979 is filed by Shri C.M. Parikh and Others, and Letters Patent Appeal No. 95 of 1979 is filed by Shri V.M. Mehta. Against the judgment and order in Special Civil...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›