Gujarat Court February 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.
Virendrasingh Fojasingh and ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of the City ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-07-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj40; (1989)1GLR531
1. Admit. Mr. G. N. Desai waives service of notice. In the facts of the case and with the consent of parties, the matter is ordered to be heard finally today.2. The appellants-plaintiffs challenge the legality and validity of notice dated December 22, 1982 issued by respondent Municipal Corporation under S. 260 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. Admittedly the suit is filed some time in April, 1998. At the time when the plaintiffs filed suit they also took out notice of motion praying for injunction restraining the Municipal Corporation from enforcing the impugned notice. The learned City Civil Court Judge passed a cryptic order as follows:'It appears that the suit is filed after the period of limitation and hence it is not desirable to grant injunction in this matter. Hence order. The application dismissed. Interim relief granted on N. M. vacated. No order as to cost. N. M. is disposed of.'It is not understood how the learned Judge came to the conclusion that th...
The Saurashtra Cement and Chemicals Industries Ltd. Vs. Adityana Gram ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-02-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR344
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.1. Mr. S.I. Nanavati, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, fairly states that the question involved in this petition is covered by the Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in [1985 (2)] 26(2) GLR 1016. The main contention in the present petition is that the Panchayat is bound to accept the agreement for lump sum payment if application is made by the factory under the provisions of Section 179(1) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1962. Section 179(1) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act reads as follows:179 (1) Subject to any rules that may be made under this Act, and regard being had to the fact that a factory itself provides in the factory area all or any of the amenities which such panchayat provides, a Gram Panchayat or as the case may be, Nagar Panchayat may arrive at an agreement with any factory with the sanction of the State Government to receive a lump sum contribution in lieu of all or any of the taxes levied by the Panchayat.2. Mr. Nanavati ...
Krashnkumar Balakram Pande Vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ba ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj20
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge (Coram: A. P. Ravani, J.) dt. Nov. 23, 1988 passed in special civil application No. 5662 of 1988. The Special Civil Application is for directing the respondents to pay the amount of reward at the rate of 10% of the recoverable amount from the Company as per Annexure 'L' to the special civil application with interest and declaring the action of the respondents regarding non-payment of reward to the petitioner as arbitrary, capricious, whimsical and illegal. There is a further prayer for declaring the order of respondent No. 2 bearing No. 3599 dt. Nov. 21,1987, Annexure 'N' to the special civil application, as null and void and declaring the same as unconstitutional, illegal and fabricated on non-existing and irrelevant grounds.2. The Short facts of the case for the purpose of disposal of this Letters patent Appeal are that the appellant seems to have given information to the...
Swastik Bearing Co. and anr. Vs. Dashrathlal Chhotalal Panchal and anr ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj145; (1989)2GLR879
ORDER1. This revision application is against the judgment and order passed by the Small Causes Court at Ahmedabad under S. 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882, directing the petitioners to hand over the possession of the premises which consists of industrial shed situated in Tavdipura area of Ahmedabad. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioners have been inducted in the premises by virtue of agreement Ex. 40 dated June 24, 1971. The petitioners have been called upon to vacate the premises by notice dated August 2, 1977 (Ex. 30). The petitioners did not vacate the premises, but gave reply contesting the claim made by the respondent applicants. Thereafter another notice dated Sept. 28, 1981 (Ex. 43) was served upon the petitioners. This was also replied to by the petitioners tenants wherein various contentions were raised. Ultimately the respondents applicants filed P.S.R.P. application under S. 41 of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 (in sh...
Dhanbai Jashabhai Miyana Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-01-1989
Reported in: (1989)1GLR584
G.T. Nanavati, J.1 Petitioner Dhanbai challenges in this petition the order of detention passed against her under Section 3(1) of the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act, 1985 by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad city. The said order of detention was passed on 13-7-1988. The Commissioner of Police has passed that order of detention on being satisfied that the petitioner is a bootlegger and that with a view to preventing her from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order, it was necessary to do so. The petitioner was served with the grounds on the same day. In the grounds, details of the case in which she was involved are mentioned. It is farther alleged in the grounds that in order to carry on her illegal activity of selling illicit liquor she is creating a reign of fear and terror by attacking persons with dangerous weapons.2. The order of detention is challenged on various grounds. However, it is not necessary to refer to all of them as this...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›