Gujarat Court October 1987 Judgments
Naranbhai Khemdas Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-16-1987
Reported in: AIR1989Guj37; (1988)1GLR37
ORDER1. Can a litigant claim that his matter be not decided at the, admission stage and be decided with certain other matters admitted on earlier occasion? While answering this question, it has become necessary to examine and understand how a decision of the Supreme Court is required to be read, interpreted and applied to other cases. Those questions arise in the background of the facts that follow.2. Petitioner is Up-Sarpanch of Langranaj Gram Panchayat, which has been ordered to be superseded under S. 297 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act by the Development Commissioner, respondent No. 2 herein as per his order dt .Sept. 14,1987. The Panchayat is superseded on the ground that it has failed to pass the budget for the year 1987-88. In the meeting of the Panchayat held on March 27, 1987 the budget estimates were placed for approval. Majority members of the Panchayat did not approve the same and thus the budget could not be passed. Show cause notice dt. June 15, 1987 was served upon the Panc...
Tag this Judgment!Khimji Raja Harijan Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-16-1987
Reported in: (1988)2GLR1008
D.H. Chauhan, J.1. By this petition under Article 226, Constitution of India, petitioner-detenu Khimji Raja Harijan has prayed for the writ of Habeas Corpus and for quashing the detention order dated January 31, 1987, passed by the District Magistrate, Bhavnagar, the detaining authority, under Section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the PASA Act') as on the detaining authority being satisfied that with a view to preventing the petitioner for acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it was necessary to detain him.2. The detention order was served to the petitioner at about 3.00 a.m. on February 2, 1987 at his residence at Mahalaxmi Mill Chawl, Bhavnagar, where his uncle Atubhai Bhikhabhai was residing with him. Shri S.B. Patel, Police Inspector of 'A' Division Police Station, Bhavnagar, who served the detention order to the petitioner, informed the petitioner's uncle Atubai Bhikhabhai in writing abo...
Tag this Judgment!Kishor Bhanuprasad Dave and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Police and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-15-1987
Reported in: (1988)2GLR839
A.P. Ravani, J.1. Rule. Mr. R.R. Tripathi waives service of rule on behalf of the respondsnts.2. Petitioners are serving in Excise Department and present they are working in the office of the Collector, Customs (Prevention) Gujarat State at Ahmedabad. The petitioners have applied on 20-11-1986 for grant of licence for revolver the description of which has been given by the petitioners in their application submitted to the authorities. The application submitted by the petitioners has not been decided by the respondent authorities and hence the petition requesting that the respondent authorities be directed to decide their application before certain date as may be specified by the Court.3. In the affidavit-in-reply, it is stated that the office of the Police Commissioner has received numerous applications from the personal serving in the department of Excise for grant of licence under the Arms Act. A grievance is made in the affidavit in reply with regard to the policy of the Government ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: 1989(22)LC638(Gujarat); 1991(53)ELT292(Guj)
1. Leave to amendment. 2. The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code with a prayer that the criminal prosecution launched against the petitioner being criminal case No. 786/85 pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First class (Addl.) rural at Narol, be quashed. In the alternative it is also prayed to stay the further proceedings in the said criminal case, pending hearing and final disposal of the appeal No. ED (SB) (A) No. 7542/84-C pending before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi. 3. It may be stated at the outset that Mr. Trivedi, the learned Advocate for the petitioner does not press the prayer for quashing the proceedings, but he presses the relief for the stay of the proceedings. 4. The short facts of the case are that the present petitioner is a company carrying on the business of manufacturing and selling cement classifiable under the erstwhile Tariff Item No. 23 of the 1st Schedule to...
Tag this Judgment!Quality Steels and Forgings Ltd. and anr. Vs. Gujarat Electricity Boar ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Guj121; (1988)1GLR165
ORDER1. Under S. 24(2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 certain differences or disputes are required to be determined by the Electrical Inspector. Before notice under S. 24(1) of the Act is given by licencee, if reference is made to the Electrical Inspector, the licensee cannot invoke the provisions of S. 24(1) of the Act and discontinue the electric supply on failure to pay the charges demanded by it. Without taking recourse to the provisions of S. 24(2) of the Act, merely by raising a dispute, may be a genuine and bona fide one (which in this case- it is not), can a consumer deprive the licensee or the board, as the case may be, from effecting recovery of its dues by resorting to the provisions of S. 24(1) of the Act This is the principal question which has surfaced for decision in this petition.2. Petitioner No. 1 is a Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of steel castings. Petitioner No. 2 is a director of the Company....
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Mohanlal Mistry Vs. Mehta Mohanlal Mathurdas
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-13-1987
Reported in: AIR1988Guj110
1. The Appellant, Mahendra Mohanlal Mistry, inhabitant of Godhra (District Panchm,ahals) was the defendant in a suit, bearing Special Civil Suit No. 45 of 1977, filed in the Courtof the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division), Godhra by the respondent, M/s. Mehta Mohanlal Mathurdas, a Partnership firm through its Partners, (1) Ramanlal Mohanlal Mehta, and (2) Sankalchand Mohanlal Mehta,having died through Rameshchandra Sankalchand Mehta, both of Godhra (District Panchamahals), for the purposes of getting possession of the suit property, bearing City Survey No. 437, situate in the City of Godhra, and for recovering a sum of Rs. 6750/-, being the arrears of rent for a period of three years prior to the date of the suit. The learned trial Judge .by his judgment and order dated 31st December, 1981 declared that the respondents were entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 10,000/-on the mortgage amount, as the principal amount, and Rs. 1,800/- for interest on the said amount and further pa...
Tag this Judgment!Assistant Collector of Customs Vs. Surendra Praggar Gosai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-09-1987
Reported in: (1988)1GLR421
B.S. Kapadia, J.1. Present application is filed against the order dt. 17-9-1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kutch at Bhuj in Criminal Revision Application No. 54 of 1987. The learned Sessions Judge has delivered common judgment in three Criminal Revision Applications being Cri. Rev. Applications Nos. 54, 55 and 56 of 1987. The said three revision applications were filed by the Asst. Collector of Customs, Bhuj against the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhuj on 2-9-1987 in an application filed by the Asst. Collector of Customs, Bhuj on 31-8-1987. The said application was rejected on the ground that the work to be done under the amended provisions of the Customs Act can be done by the Executive Magistrates or Sub-Divisional Magistrates and, therefore, that work should be assigned to them and not to the Magistrates doing Judicial work. Against the aforesaid order revision application was filed but the same has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge.2....
Tag this Judgment!Sports Club of Gujarat Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1988)67CTR(Guj)233; [1988]171ITR504(Guj)
A.M. Ahmadi, J.1. The assessee, the Sports Club of Gujarat Limited, Ahmedabad, a club incorporated as a limited company on January 18, 1963, limited by guarantee, has the following as its main objects set out in the memorandum and articles of association : '(a) To encourage and promote the game of cricket and other games and sports. (b) To lay our any ground for playing the game of cricket and for other games and sports and for other purposes of the club and to provide pavilions, refreshment rooms and other conveniences in connection therewith, and with a view thereto, purchase, lease or otherwise acquire land at such price or rent and for such period and upon such terms and conditions as may seem expedient. (c) To afford its members all the usual privileges, conveniences and accommodation of a residential club.... (i) To raise money by subscriptions and grant any rights and privileges to subscribers.... (m) To hire and employ secretaries, clerks, managers, coaches, professionals, ...
Tag this Judgment!M.D. Juvekar Vs. Modern Bakeries (India) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-08-1987
Reported in: (1987)2GLR1375; (1988)ILLJ433Guj
1. Petitioner who was employed as Sales Manager by Respondent No. 1-Company (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') has filed this petition challenging the legality and validity of the order Annexure 'I' dated April 21, 1980, by which his services were terminated. 2. Petitioner joined service of the Company as Sales Assistant on October 23, 1967. In April 1973 the petitioner was promoted as Sales Manager on probation and he was posted at Kanpur. On satisfactory completion of the probation period he was confirmed as Sales Manager. It is the petitioner's case that his performance as Sales Manager at Kanpur was excellent and he was, therefore, transferred to Ahmedabad in or about 1975. It is submitted that on account of the efforts made by the petitioner, the sales position had materially improved. However, in 1977-78, the petitioner received several complaints from the customers and merchants regarding the quality of bread manufactured by the Company. The petitioner, therefore, drew t...
Tag this Judgment!Banaskantha District Fire Works Association Vs. District Magistrate, B ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Oct-05-1987
Reported in: AIR1989Guj48
ORDER1. The petitioner is an association of businessmen selling fireworks. The petitioner challenges the legality and validity of the order annexure-H dt. Sept. 19/123, 1987 passed by the District Magistrate, Palanpur. By this order the petitioner's application for renewal of licence for selling f ire-crackers in the bazar area has been rejected on the ground that the place in respect of which licence is applied for, is situated in a thickly populated locality; hence if the licence is granted in respect of these premises it would damage the public interest. It is also stated that the premises in question are not in accordance with the provisions of R. 135 of the Explosives Rules, 1983.2. The petition is not maintainable because against the impugned order an appeal is provided for under the relavant provisions of the Indian Explosives Act, 1884 and the Rules. But the learned counsel for the petitioner insisted that the petition be heard by this Court as the petitioners do not know which...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »