Gujarat Court January 1989 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.
Kalubhai Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-31-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ496; (1989)2GLR765
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. This petition, challenging the order of detention dated 18-7-88 passed against the petitioner by the Commissioner of Police. Ahmedabad City on the ground that the petitioner is a bootlegger and a dangerous person and that his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, deserves to be allowed on the ground that the same was passed without proper application of mind,2. In the grounds, it is stated that the petitioner is a bootlegger and is carrying on the said activity either himself or through his associates. It is thereafter stated that in connection with the said activity four cases have been registered against him, and that he was arrested in those four cases. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that except in one case viz. an offence registered as C.R. No. 163 87 the petitioner was not involved in any of the criminal cases mentioned in the grounds. Having seen the material, we find that the petitioner was not an accused ei...
Kashiben and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-27-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj24; (1989)2GLR454
1. This Special Civil Application is for issuing a writ, direction or order for quashing and setting aside the sanctioned plan wherein the Surat Urban Development Authority had shown Final Plot No. 109 of the petitioners for reservation of the cottage industry by the Surat Municipal Corporation. There is a further prayer for restraining the respondents in any way from implementing the said plan. Further consequential prayers have also been made in this Special Civil Application. Rule was issued. Mr. G. M. Desai, the learned counsel, appears for the 2nd respondent and waives service of Rule. Mr. Chhaya appears for the 1st respondent and waives service of Rule. As far as the 3rd respondent is concerned, we feel that this petition can be disposed of in his absence on the facts and circumstances of this case. Since the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the 1st and 2nd respondents are agreeable to dispose of the matter finally, we have taken up this petition for final dispos...
Gautam Shirishbhai AmIn and Etc. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-25-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj97; (1989)1GLR527
ORDER1. Both these petitions involve common questions regarding transfer of a student admitted on the Donor's seats in First M.B.B.S. in M.P. Shah Medical College, Jamnagar to another Medical College in the State. In Special Civil Application No. 6593 of 1988, rule is already issued on 24-11-1988. Therefore, rule is directed to be issued in Special Civil Application No. 6804 of 1988. The learned advocate Mr. R.R. Tripathi and Mr. V. H. Mehta waive service of rule for their respective clients.By consent of the learned advocate, both the matters are taken up for final hearing today.2. The petitioners have obtained admission to First M.B.B.S. class in M.P. Shah Medical College, Jamnagar on the seats reserved for Donors; namely M.P. Shah Charitable Trust (respondent No. 4). At the time of that admission, the petitioners had executed a bond which prescribes that the student shall diligently prosecute and complete the said course at the said college and shall not change the college till he/s...
Hiralal K. Joshi Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-24-1989
Reported in: (1989)2GLR1183
R.C. Mankad, J.1. Petitioners, employees of the District Panchayat of Baroda, have filed these petitions challenging issuance of second charge-sheets against them and holding of fresh inquiry in pursuance of such charge-sheets by the District Development Officer of the District Panchayat of Baroda. Since common questions are involved in these petitions, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. Facts leading to these petitions briefly stated are as follows:Petitioners of Special Civil Applications Nos. 3715 of 1983 and 3742 of 1985 were at the relevant time employed as Circle Inspectors while petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 5022 of 1985 was employed as Clerk in the Waghodia Taluka of the Baroda District. Taluka Development Officer of Waghodia Taluka Panchayat granted permission for non-agricultural use of several parcels of land bearing different survey numbers and situated in different villages of Waghodia Taluka. It was alleged that the Taluka Development Officer ha...
District Superintendent of Police and anr. Vs. Ghanshyamsinh Zala
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-23-1989
Reported in: (1989)2GLR723
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is againt the order passed by the learned single Judge, allowing Special Civil Application No. 5484 of 1986. Two Constables, for whom order of appointment was issued as early as 17-12-1983 were sent for training. It is alleged that, in the examination held, they indulged in copying and as such, the impugned order, discharging the respondent and another, came to be passed on 28-4-1984. Questioning the same, the respondent came forward with the Special Civil Application. The other Constable, who has also been discharged, has filed another Special Civil Application, and that Constable is not before us today. The learned single Judge, who went into the question, found that the discharge has been effected by way of punishment and the failure to follow the procedure prescribed under An. 311 (2) of the Constitution vitiates vitates such discharge. After setting aside the order of discharge, the learned Judge has also given the full backwa...
Dharmishthaben Hasmukhbhai Vs. Dr. Hasmukhbhai Pradhandas Ranpur and a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-18-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2132; I(1990)DMC202; (1989)2GLR776
A.S. Qureshi, J.1. The petitioner herein is the lawfully wedded wife of the respondent No. 1. She has challenged the judgment and order dated 7-12-1985 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No. 3, Ahmedabad, rejecting her application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. She has also claimed in this Revision Application the enhancement of the amount of maintenance of Rs. 200 p.m. awarded to each of the two children of the couple.2. The trial Court rejected the petitioner-wife's application for maintenance on the ground that she did not prove that the respondent-husband had failed and neglected to maintain her. In coming to the said conclusion, the trial Court had taken into consideration the correspondence between the parties, especially Exhs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 17, 18 and 19. From the aforesaid letters, the trial Court drew the conclusion that there was no evidence of beating or torture or harassment by the husband to the wife. It also inferred that the wife...
Gagubhai and ors. Vs. Goswami Bhikhu Gangaram
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj5; [1990]68CompCas124(Guj); (1989)1GLR655
J.P. Desai, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the common judgment delivered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kutch at Bhuj In MADCAP. No.276 of 1983 and MADCAP. No. 272 of 1986 whereby awards for Rs. 1 lac and Rs. 61,720/- have been passed respectively in the aforesaid applications. These two appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the common judgment delivered by the learned Tribunal.2. In MADCAP. No. 276 of 1983 the amount claimed was Rs. 1 lac while in MADCAP. No. 272 of 1983, the amount claimed was Rs. 75,000/-. It may be mentioned here that two other applications were also filed arising out of the same incident in which the claim did not exceed Rs. 25,000/-. These four applications were heard together and disposed of by a common judgment. It may be mentioned here that the procedure laid down by O.XIX of the C.P.C. was followed by the Tribunal in disposing of all these applications. The claims in the two petitions exceed Rs. 25,000/- and,...
Gagubhai Alias Ramaiya Mura Vs. Goswami Bhikhu Gangaram and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 1(1989)ACC453
J.P. Desai, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the common judgment delivered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kutch at Bhuj in M.A.C.P. No. 276 of 1983 and M.A.C.P. No. 272 of 1986 whereby awards for Rs. 1 lac and Rs. 61,720/- have been passed respectively in the two aforesaid applications. These two appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the common judgment delivered by the learned Tribunal.2. In M.A.C.P. No. 276 of 1983, the amount claimed was Rs. 1 lac while in M A.C.P. No. 272 of 1983, the amount claimed was Rs. 75,000/-. It may be mentioned here that two other applications were also filed arising out of the same incident in which the claim did not exceed Rs 25,000/-. These four applications were heard together and disposed of by a common judgment. It may be mentioned here that the procedure laid down by Order XIX of the Civil Procedure Code was followed by the Tribunal in disposing of all these applications. The claim in the two petition...
R.M. Dalal Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-12-1989
Reported in: (1989)2GLR1098
P.M. Chauhan, J.1. Petitioner, an Assistant Examiner. Local Funds Account, serving under the Director of Accounts and Treasuries, was served with a notice dated August 26, 1977 informing That he should be compulsorily retired from the Government service with effect from November 30, 1977, under the provisions of Rule 161. Bombay Civil Services Rules (to be referred to as 'B.C.S.R.'') and. accordingly. was made to retire from the service on November 30, 1977 as he had attained the age of 55 years. Petitioner made a representation against the order of retirement to the higher authorities, but That was also rejected by the Government on November 24, 1977. Petitioner has challenged the order of premature retirement at the age of 55 years on various grounds and, by this writ, has prayed for declaring the order illegal and bad, and violative of Articles 14 and 16, Constitution of India. According to the petitioner, he should have been given opportunity, to serve in (the lower grade of Class ...
Vikrambhai Dhirajibhai Patel Vs. A.S. Jog and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jan-11-1989
Reported in: AIR1989Guj233; (1989)1GLR690
ORDER1. Petitioner challenged the order dated October 19, 1979 by the District Registrar Co-operative Societies, Mehsana, directing to remove the petitioner from the membership of Khorsam Khedut Seva Sahakari Mandali Ltd., Khorsam, Tal. Chanasma, District Mehsana, in exercise of his power under sub-see. (2) of S. 23, Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), as according to the District Registrar the petitioner had made false declaration that he was permanent resident of Khorsam village and was entitled to be the member of the said Society and that he was also the member of the Co-operative Society at Chanasma which is permanent place of residence of the petitioner. The challenge to the order is mainly on the ground that the petitioner had not made any declaration much less false declaration and that the District Registrar had no jurisdiction to remove the petitioner from the membership of the Co-operative Society and only the society can exercise s...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »