Gujarat Court August 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.
A.C. Barot Vs. District Superintendent of Police and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-19-1989
Reported in: (1990)2GLR888
P.M. Chauhan, J.1. Can a Police Officer against whom a complaint is filed for offences which are not serious and not committed in discharge of duty be suspended Under what circumstances a Police Officer can be suspended What should be the criteria for suspension during contemplated disciplinary action Are some of vital points requiring consideration in this Writ Petition.2. Petitioner, a Sub-Inspector of Police has challenged the order of suspension by the District Superintendent of Police, Panchmahals at Godhra, contending, inter alia, that in the facts and circumstances of the case the suspension during the inquiry is not warranted nor such suspension order can be passed under the provisions of the Bombay Police (Punishment & Appeals) Rules, 1956, enacted under the provisions of Section 25 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 and under the relevant provisions of the Gujarat Police Manual, 1975. It is also contended that the alleged act of misconduct is alleged to have been committed not in...
Maheshchandra Morarji Jani and ors. Vs. S.M. Shukla and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-19-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Guj171; (1990)2GLR753
ORDER1. In these revision applications under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a neat question of jurisdiction of Court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Devgadh-Baria in connection with the proceedings under Ss. 14 and 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 arises for consideration., In order to appreciate this question, in its proper perspective, a few introductory facts are required to be noted. 2. A partnership firm in the name of Ramanlal Maheshchandra and Company was carrying on business at village Piplod of Baria taluka of Panchamahals district. The petitioners on the one hand and respondents Nos. 2 to 6 on the other were partners in the said partnership firm. Certain disputes arose in connection with partnership business and in view of the arbitration clause in the partnership deed, these disputes were referred to arbitration of respondent No.1 herein who is common respondent in both these revision applications. Disputes were referred by respondents Nos. 2 and 3. Written terms of Refer...
Yeast Alco Enzymes Limited Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR362
S.B. Majumdar, J.1. This letters patent appeal under clause XV of the Letter Patent is directed against the decision of V. V. Bedarkar, J., in Special Civil Application No. 959 of 1983. The learned single Judge partly allowed the Special Civil Application in favour of the present appellants who are the original petitioners. The appellants feeling aggrieved by that part of the judgment of the learned Judge by which their claim for being awarded pioneer unit benefits under the Government resolution dated 27th August, 1980, at annexure B to the petition, has been rejected, have moved the present appeal. The respondent-authorities have not filed any cross-appeal and have acquiesced in the decision of the learned single Judge allowing the writ petition partly and in granting some of the benefits to the appellants under the very same resolution. As the appellants are the original petitioners and the respondents are the original respondents in the writ petition, for the sake of convenience, w...
State of Gujarat Vs. Sypoi Alambhai Jamalbhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR122
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. This appeal presents a very peculiar and paradoxical picture wherein though on one hand this Court anhesitatingly has reached a conclusion that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal per se is a case of 'Rushed-up acquittal' and hence being patently unjudicial and illegal, deserves an obvious order of remand, and yet on the other hand having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case enlisted hereunder, at this stage, this Court has a feeling that it would not be expedient in the larger interest of justice to remand the case as the same will be more of a prosecution rather than the prosecution of the accused. However, but for the only plus point in this appeal viz., that it has provided an opportunity to express a word or two of advice to the erring trial Court and so defaulting other Courts to conduct and manage themselves with some sense of responsibility while trying criminal cases, whole exercise of hearing this appeal and delivering the judgment woul...
Usmangani Abdulrehman Mansuri Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR325
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, read with Articles 14 and 16 thereof, 155 employees whose names are listed at Annexure 'D' to the petition and who are working on different posts as foremen, mechanics, helpers, fitters etc. in the Central Workshop division and Water Tanker sub-division at Odhav, Ahmedabad and who are in service of the first respondent-State in the Public Works Department, have raised two grievances against the State of Gujarat and the Superintending Engineer who is the head of the department and who are respondents Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. The first grievance is that the respondents are not giving benefit of all public holidays declared during any calendar year to be enjoyed by the State Government employees, to the petitioners and the second grievance is that they are also denied the benefit of second and fourth Saturdays which are already treated as paid holiday for other Government servants. According to the petitioners,...
V.V. Bhramkshtriya and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1989
Reported in: (1990)1GLR256
R.C. Mankad, J.1. This group of petitions, though it involves conflict of interest between direct recruits and promotes, does not raise the usual controversy of inter se seniority between them. The main dispute here centres around the Rule fixing the quota of direct recruits and promotees, and the contention of the rival groups is that this Rules has been violated. The stand of the State Government, however, is that it has adhered to the quota rule, and no appointments have been made in branch thereof.2. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary to refer to the facts and the background in which, the question regarding fulfilment of quota Rule has arisen before me. The Rules called Executive Engineers ('XEN' for short) (Civil) Gujarat Service of Engineers Class-I Recruitment Rules, 1979 ('GSE Class-I Rules' for short) and Deputy Engineers ('DEN' for short) (Civil) Gujarat Service of Engineers Class-II Recruitment Rules, 1979 ('GSE Class-II Rules' for short) were made...
Commissioner, Jamnagar Municipal Corporation, Jamnagar and anr. Vs. Vi ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ712; AIR1990Guj134; (1990)1GLR664
Ravani, J. 1. Respondent-original claimant met with an automobile accident on February 19, 1983 while boarding a public bus belonging to Jamnagar Municipal Corporation. He fell down from the bus as the bus had started all of a sudden with a jerk. On account of the accidental injuries he was admitted in hospital as indoor patient. The injury resulted into permanent partial functional disability of left lower limb to the extent of 22%. The doctor who has examined the injured has also opined that the injured will have difficulty in walking and running and it will be difficult for him to sit cross-legged and in squatting position.2. The respondent-ori. applicant claimed an amount of Rs. 1,31,280 /- as and by way of compensation. The appellants herein i.e. the Commissioner of Jamnagar Municipal Corporation and the Driver of the bus and the Insurance Company (respondent No. 2 herein) resisted the claim of the applicant on various grounds. The motor Accident claim Tribunal came to the conclus...
Commissioner of Jamnagar Municipal Corpn. and anr. Vs. Vijaykumar Bhag ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-11-1989
Reported in: I(1991)ACC61
Ravani, J.1. Respondent-original claimant met with an automobile accident on February 19, 1983 while boarding a public bus belonging to Jamnagar Municipal Corporation. He fell down from the bus as the bus had started all of a sudden with a jerk. On account of the accidental injuries he was admitted in hospital as indoor patient. The injury resulted into permanent partial functional disability of left lower limb to the extent of 22%. The Doctor who has examined the injured has also opined that the injured will have difficulty in walking and running and it will be difficult for him to sit cross-legged and in squatting position.2. The respondent-original applicant claimed an amount of Rs. 1, 31, 280/- as and by way of compensation. The appellants herein i.e. the Commissioner of Jamnagar Municipal Corporation and the Driver of the bus and the Insurance Company (respondent No. 2 herein) resisted the claim of the applicant on various grounds. The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal came to the con...
State of Gujarat Vs. Gulamnabi Alias Fakir Mohmad and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-09-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2245; (1990)1GLR60
K.J. Vaidya, J. 1. The controversy in this acquittal appeal is -- who is responsible for acquittal of two accused? The prosecution Agency for 'want of prosecution' as held by the trial Court? Or the trial Court, for 'want of fair trial to the prosecution' as submitted by the appellant State.2. The above acquittal appeal arises out of the judgment and order, dated 3rd Oct. 1980, in Criminal Case No. 679/80, passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Rajpipla (for short hereafter referred to as the trial-court) whereby the respondent accused No. 1 Gulamnabi alias Fakir Mohmad and Accused No. 2 Bashirkhan Nawazkhan came to be charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 453, 114 and 506 of I.P.C. came to be acquitted on the very threshold of the trial on the ground of want of prosecution.3. Briefly the prosecution case, as disclosed from the complaint filed by the complainant Gulamrasul Mahmadbhai Qureshi, is that the complainant is doing a business in the name and style of 'Firoz Cutpi...
State of Gujarat and anr. Vs. Mulchand Lakhansinh Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-07-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2399; (1990)1GLR195
ORDERK.J. Vaidya, J.1. The above Special Criminal Application arises out of the judgment and order dated, 13th May, 1981, rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1982 by the learned Sessions Judge, Valsad, (hereinafter for short referred to as the learned Judge), whereby he allowed the said Appeal filed by Shri Mulchand Lakhansinh Shah (for short referred to as, opponent) quashing and setting aside the order dated 6th February, 1982, passed by the District Supply Officer, Valsad, (for short referred to as D.S.C. Valsad), confiscating 74 tins of Pamoline edible oil (for short referred to as M. M. oil tins).2. Briefly speaking, on the secret tipoff on 13th May 1981, the Chief Supply Inspector, Valsad, alongwith Deputy Mamlatdar, Supply Branch, Pardi, raided a cabin No. 5 of one Shivbhalsinh Rajbahadursing and seized 74 oil tins of the ownership of the opponent.3. After necessary inquiry, the Chief Supply Inspector submitted a report on 16th November, 1981, alongwith relevant papers to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›