Gujarat Court July 1988 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.
Balugiri Manigiri Goswami Vs. Additional Development Commissioner, Guj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-13-1988
Reported in: (1989)2GLR808
A.M. Ahmadi, J.1. The appellant is the original petitioner He was elected as a member of the Bayad Taluka Panchayat (District Sabarkantha) on a Janata Party ticket at the election held sometime in January 1987 was subsequently elected as the President of the Taluka Panchayat on February 24, 1987. The respondent No. 4 was also elected as a member of the said Panchayat on a Congress (I) ticket. It appears that respondent No. 4 moved a notice of no confidence against the petitioner on Mas 16, 1988. As required by Section 60(5)(a) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961, (hereinafter called 'the Act') the petitioner called a meeting of the Panchayat on June 7, 1988. It is the case of the petitioner that at the said meeting the discussion on the no confidence motion was held but thereafter the meeting was adjourned to June 15, 1988. It seems that after the meeting was so adjourned, the Secretary of the Taluka Panchayat submitted a report to the District Development Officer (respondent No. 2) who...
Wimco Ltd. Vs. Liberty Match Co. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-1988
Reported in: (1988)2GLR1390; (1988)2GLR594
D.H. Shukla, J.1. The appellant (original plaintiff), Wimco Ltd., is a public limited company, incorporated and registered under the Indian Companies Act, having its registered office at Indian Mercantile Chambers, Ramjibhai Kamani Marg, Bombay-38. It is carrying-on the business of manufacturing match boxes since last 65 years. It manufactures match boxes under the names 'Kapas' and 'Home Lites'. It is having its factories at different places in India.2. Defendant No. 1, Liberty Match Company is a registered partnership firm having its registered office at Kovilpatti in Tamil Nadu. It is also manufacturing match boxes since last two years under the trade name of 'Chameli' and 'Flying Horse'. Defendant No.2 is also a partnership firm and it is working as distributor and/or stockiest of defendant No.1 in the City of Ahmedabad and nearby markets, defendant No.5 is also a partnership firm of which defendant Nos. 3 and 4 are the partners. Defendant No. 5 is also appointed as distributor and...
Brij Kishore S. Ghosh Vs. Jayantilal Maneklal Bhatt and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1988
Reported in: AIR1989Guj227; (1989)1GLR58
ORDER1. One may legitimately ask - 'why too many judgments insisting liberal approach while interpreting 'sufficient cause' occurring in S. 5 of the Limitation Act,1963?' The answer is simple and yet disappointing. It is very hard to change the dogmatic approach having its roots in old traditions and irrationality. The case on hand, provide, as an illustration as to how much difficult (almost impossible) it is to change such mental attitude and in still new thinking?2. Respondents-plaintiffs filed regular civil suit No. 176 of 1979, in the Court of Civil Judge (SD), Narol for recovery of possession of the suit premises on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent and for reasonable and bona fide requirements. The petitioner defendant appeared in the suit. One Mr. Makwana, learned advocate engaged by the defendant filed joint vakalatnama of himself and that of another advocate Mr. Rathod. After the appearance was filed the matter was being adjourned from time to time. On Sept. 11, 19...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›