Gujarat Court July 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.
Nanjibhai Ratnabhai Chaudhari Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-1989
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2313; (1990)1GLR181
M.B. Shah, J.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 12th May 1989 passed by the Special Judge, Bharuch, in Special Case No. 1 of 1987, the accused has filed this appeal. The learned Special Judge has convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and has sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ -, in default, R I. for a period of three months for each of the aforesaid offences. He has ordered both the substantive sentences to run concurrently.2. When the matter came up for admission, the record and proceedings were called for.3. The main question involved in this appeal is whether the order sanctioning prosecution is valid or not. The further question which was raised by the learned counsel for the appellant was whether the defence has probabilized its say that the accused had accepted the amount of Rs. 500/-from th...
Girishchandra Bhagubhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR543
A.P. Ravani, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the order of detention dated December 17, 1988 passed by the District Magistrate, Bharuch under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Prevention of Blackmarketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The order was executed on December 19, 1988. The maximum period of preventive detention as provided under the Act is six months. Therefore, had the petitioner remained in detention continuously he would have been released by now. But it is stated at the Bar that on six different occasions the petitioner has been temporarily released by the State Government by issuing order under Section 15 of the Act. Such period of temporary release is of about 100 days. The petitioner has challenged the order of detention and his continued detention as being illegal and void and has therefore prayed the he be released forthwith.2. The grounds of detention supplied...
Damayantiben Natwarlal Patel and anr. Vs. the Manek Chowk Co-operative ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-05-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj89; (1989)2GLR581
ORDER1. Petitioners in all the five petitions under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, have challenged the orders on interim injunction applications in five Arbitration Suits before the Nominee of the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, vacating the ad interim injunction granted at the initial stage not to directly set off the deposit amount by the respective petitioners with the respondent Bank towards the outstanding debt of the partnership firm M/s. National Wire Manufacturing Co. and the orders rejecting the respective Revision Applications by the Gujarat State Co-operative Tribunal, Ahmedabad.2. M/s. National Wire . on or about July 12, 1984 on creating equitable mortgage of their Galaxy Cinema worth Rs.35 Lacs and agreed to several other conditions one of which was that Fixed Deposits of the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- should be discharged in favour of the respondent Bank and the said Fixed Deposit should not be encashed till the amount including the interest is due and the debt ...
Babubhai Bhimjibhai Vs. the District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1959; (1990)1GLR75
A.P. Ravani, J. 1. The petitioner has been detained pursuant to order dated January 10, 1989 passed by the District Magistrate, Panchmahals at Godra. The order of detention is passed under the provisions of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (for short 'the Act').2. The petitioner is a licence holder, issued under the provisions of the Gujarat Essential Articles (Licensing, Control and Stock Declaration) Order, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Control Order of 1981). This control order is issued under the provisions of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. As disclosed in the grounds of detention supplied to the petitioner-detenu it is alleged that the petitioner indulged in several irregularities in respect of essential commodities such as wheat, rice, sugar and pamolein Oil. It is inter alia alleged that he did not maintain proper accounts; that he issued fake bills and that the stock which was meant for distribution to the...
Ramanbhai Ambalal Patel Vs. Ishwarbhai Somabhai Patel and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj94; (1989)2GLR561
Gokulakrishnan, C.J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is against the order passed by the learned single Judge in an interlocutory application, i.e. Civil Application No. 2197 of 1988 in Special Civil Application No. 6230 of 1988. 2. The short facts of this case are that there was a Notification to elect a Sarpanch of Ranoli Gram Panchayat issued on 21-05-1987. Nominations were called for and time was given to file nomination papers from 01-06-1987 to 03-06-1987. On 04-06-1987, there was a scrutiny of the nomination papers. Respondent No. 1 herein filled up his nomination papers on 29-05-1987 in two forms and submitted one of them on 01-06-1987 and the other on 03-06-1987. The District Development Officer has removed the respondent No. I from the office of Sarpanch, which post respondent No.1, was holding, by his order dated 03-06-1987. An objection was taken regarding the nomination papers filed by the respondent No.1 on 04-06-1987. The said objection was overruled by the Scrutiny Officer...
Dr. Jayesh Vasudevbhai Trivedi Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR278
P.M. Chauhan, J.1. Petitioner, an Assistant Professor in Medicine, working in Intensive Coronary Care Unit (hereinafter referred to as ICCU), Institute of Cardiology, Civil Hospital, Ahmedabad, has challenged the transfer as the Assistant Professor Medicine, M.P. Shah Medical College, Jamnagar, by Government by order dated April 11, 1989 and the order dated April 12, 1989 relieving him to join the new assignment in M.P. Shah Medical College, Jamnagar, on various grounds viz., that the petitioner having been appointed as the Asstt. Professor, Cardiology Unit, cannot be transferred as Asstt. Professor of Medicine, to the institution having no Cardiology Unit; that by transfer the prospects for the promotion as Associate Professor would be affected, that the transfer is mala fide and that he would be caused personal inconvenience as his wife is to appear for the M.D. Examination and the climate at Jamnagar will not suit his old parents.2. The petitioner was appointed as the Assistant Prof...
Kesharsinh Pahadsinh and ors. Vs. Dy. Police Commissioner and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-03-1989
Reported in: (1989)2GLR1277
P.M. Chauhan, J.1. Petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 3163 of 1989, Head Constables serving at different Police Stations under the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City, Ahmedabad and the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 3359 of 1989 Head Constable working at Railway Police Station, Viramgam, have challenged the order dated April 29, 1989 by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City and order dated April 29, 1989 by the Superintendent of Police, Western Railway, Baroda, passed under Rule 121 of the Gujarat Police Manual, directing them to join Unarmed Head Constables Refreshers Course at P.T.C. Junagadh, from May 1, 1989, mainly contending that under the provisions of Rule 121 of the Gujarat Police Manual the directions to attend the Unarmed Head Constables Refresher Course, cannot be passed without the request and the consent of the concerned Unarmed Head Constables who were previously sent for Refresher Course but could not complete it i.e., failed. According t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›