Gujarat Court April 1986 Judgments
District Superintendent of Police, Vadodara Rural and ors. Vs. Chhatra ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-08-1986
Reported in: (1986)2GLR1210
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. The appellants herein have challenged the order dated 7-1-1986 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) Baroda, granting ad-interim injunction pending the disposal of the suit or till the plaintiff completes three years at Kareli Police Station, whichever is earlier. The learned trial Judge in his long order has considered various points which were urged before him while granting the interim injunction as prayed for.2. Mr. S.R. Divetia, the learned A.G.P. has urged that the learned trial Judge was not justified in granting the interim injunction to the present respondent, as according to him, the transfer order was made on the ground of exigency of service or for administrative reasons. According to Mr. Divetia the authority concerned alone has to satisfy itself that such an exigency or administrative reason exists. He submits that it is not open to the court to scrutinise and examine whether such an exigency or such a reason does or does not exist. Mr. Divetia has r...
Tag this Judgment!Narayanlal Himatlal Bhatt and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-04-1986
Reported in: (1986)2GLR1240
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. A retired High Court Judge and three others have filed this public interest litigation questioning the constitutional validity of the Gujarat Legislative Assembly Members' Pension Act, 1984 with a further prayer to issue a writ of mandamus against the State of Gujarat restraining it from issuing any notification in the Official Gazette for appointing the date for coming into force of the impugned Act. i.e. the Gujarat Legislative Assembly Members' Pension Act, 1984. In and by the said Act, the members of the Legislative Assembly are given the opportunity of receiving pension of Rs. 300/- who have served as members for a term of office of five years whether before or after such commencement and whether continuously or not. The Act further provides that where any person has served as aforesaid for a period exceeding five years, he will be paid an additional pension of Rs. 60/- per month for every year of such service in excess of five years and that, however, ...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shanabhai Arjanbhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-03-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Guj185; [1987]62CompCas665(Guj); (1987)1GLR247
M.B. Shah, J.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the award in M.A.C. Petitions Nos. 473, 494, 523, 503, 495, 496 and 497 of 1983 the Insurance Company has filed the aforesaid First Appeals.2. It is the contention of the Insurance Company that the claimants were sitting in the truck as passengers and they were not standing on the road as contended by them when the truck turned turtle. For this there is no evidence on record. On the contrary the injured claimants have in terms stated that they were standing on the road and because of the truck turning turtle they were injured. This evidence was appreciated by the Tribunal in Paras 59, 60 and 61. There is no other contrary evidence. In our view, therefore, it cannot be said that the finding of the Tribunal is in any way erroneous which calls for interference in appeal. The learned advocate for the appellant further contended that the Tribunal ought not to have awarded penal interest of 12%. As against this, the learned advocate for the...
Tag this Judgment!Vardhilal Amritlal Vs. Bhuralal and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-02-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Guj50; (1986)2GLR1230
ORDER1. The original plaintiff has preferred this Revision Application against the j6dgment and order of the learned District Judge, Banaskantha, dt. 2nd Nov. 1982. whereby he allowed the appeal and dismissed. the plaintiffs suit. The facts leading to this Revision Application, briefly stated, are as under : -2. The plaintiff instituted a Civil Suit No. 29 of 1972 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Deodar, to recover a sum of Rs. 2,000/- with interest and costs. The aggregate amount claimed in the suit was Rs. 2540/- inclusive of interest up to the date of the institution of the suit. That suit was decreed by the learned trial Judge against which the defendants preferred an appeal to the District Court, Banaskantha. That Appeal No. 56 of 1974 was heard by the learned Assistant Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur, who by his judgment and order dt. 20th Oct. 1976 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the decree of the trial Court. Against that decision the defendants pref...
Tag this Judgment!Haji Noormomed Jusab Mithani and ors. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-01-1986
Reported in: 1987(11)ECC329
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. By this common judgment we propose to dispose of this batch of 13 petitions.2. The Government of Gujarat being satisfied with respect to the petitioner in each of these petitions, that with a view to preventing them from smuggling goods it was necessary so to do, made orders for their detention under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act') on 1-6-1985. The Government was so satisfied because the petitioners who were crew of the vessel MSV Laxmi had, on their return trip from Dubai smuggled into India contraband gold, wrist watches and other articles approximately valued at Rs. 26,00,000. The declarations under Section 9 of Act the were made by the Additional Secretary to the Government of India, specially empowered in that behalf by the Central Government, with respect to the petitioners on 5-7-1985. All the petitioners had challenged the orders of their detention, dec...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›