Gujarat Court December 1990 Judgments
Tulsidas Madhavdas Sharma Vs. Smt. Shantiben Tulsidas Sharma and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-1990
Reported in: II(1991)DMC397; (1991)2GLR190
V.H. Bhairavia, J.1. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed by the petitioner (Orig. opponent-husband) challenging the judgment and order dated 29.3.1983 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 3, Ahmedabad below application of the opponent dated 10.8.1983 in Misc. Cri. Application No. 150 of 1983. By that application, the petitioner-opponent took preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of Misc. Cri. Application No. 150 of 1983 filed by the respondent-Wife under Section 125 of the Cr. P. Code for getting maintenance from the petitioner on the ground that there is bar of res judicata in view of the order passed by the Civil Court against the respondent-Wife in Civil Suit No. 1173 of 1977 and H.M.P. Suit No. 298 of 1980 wherein it has been held by the Civil Court that the petitioner-Husband has not deserted the respondent-Wife and she was not entitled to the decree of restitution of conjugal rights and suit was dismissed. Said judgment and order of...
Tag this Judgment!Jenabai and ors. Vs. Gujarat State Road Trans. Corpn. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC529; 1991ACJ585; (1991)1GLR352
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kutch at Bhuj, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 14 of 1975, by invoking the aids of the provisions of Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ('Act' for short hereinafter).2. A short, but interesting, question which has arisen in this appeal is, as to whether legal representatives of the deceased claimant, who had sustained injuries in a vehicular accident and who had died a death unconnected with the injuries which arose but of the road accident, are entitled to continue the action for compensation? With a view to appreciate the aforesaid question raised in this appeal, a resume of material facts may be stated at the outset.3. One deceased Abdul Karim Musa, who is hereinafter referred to as the 'original claimant' for the sake of convenience and brevity, claimed Rs. 9,999/- by way of compensation for the personal injuries sustained by him in an accident on accou...
Tag this Judgment!N.S. Shah Vs. C.M. Trivedi and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR732
B.J. Shethna, J.1. The petitioner-accused who was working as a registered clerk to Advocates of this Court had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 6,835/- entrusted to him by the respondent No. 1-Advocate Shri C.M. Trivedi for the purpose of making payment of Court-fee stamp which amount, Advocate Shri C.M. Trivedi had received from his clients.2. The petitioner-accused was tried for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code ('Code' for short) before the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate found the petitioner-accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 408 of the Code and the petitioner-accused was ordered to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default to further undergo 3 months' Rigorous Imprisonment.3. The petitioner-accused had challenged the aforesaid order before the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City, Ahmedabad and th...
Tag this Judgment!Kantaben Widow of Dahyabhai Maganbhai and ors. Vs. Additional Special ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-27-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR567
S.D. Soni, J.1. The appellants-original claimants have filed this appeal against the Judgment and Award dt. 3-2-1979 passed by learned City Civil Judge (Court No. 10) in Compensation Case No. 2 of 1977. The claimants are the owners of land bearing Survey No. 361 of village Rakhial, Taluka City Ahmedabad. Part of the land admeasuring 3650 sq. mtrs. was sought to be acquired for circular road for National Highway. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act ('Act' for short) was published on 31-10-1971. The Notification under Section 6 of the Act was published on 1-3-1973. Notices under Section 9 were served on the concerned parties and after considering the evidence the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 13-8-1976 whereby he awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 5-50 per sq. mtr. The claimants being dissatisfied with the said Award requested the Land Acquisition Officer to make reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Officer made reference bef...
Tag this Judgment!Narbharam Pitambardas Soni Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-26-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR861
J.U. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner has challenged ation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (COFEPOSA). The order of detention along with the grounds of detention and the materials were served to the detenu on 25-5-1990. As per the impugned order, the detenu was detained with a view to preventing him from dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled goods.2. The learned Advocate for the petitioner raised several grounds challenging the impugned order of detention. However, one of the main grounds canvassed on behalf of the petitioner is that there is delay in considering the representation of the detenu by respondent No. 1 and, therefore, the continued detention of the detenu is bad and illegal.3. Our attention is invited by the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner to ground 6(v)of the petition. The contention as set out in the said ground is as under:The petitioner says and submits that th...
Tag this Judgment!MayuddIn Abbasmiya Malik Vs. Shanabhai Shankerbhai Valand and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-24-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ881
J.N. Bhatt, J. 1. A group of these four appeals arose out of a common judgment and award. Therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellants are the original opponent Nos. 1 and 2, respondent No. 2 in all these appeals is the original opponent No. 3. For the sake of convenience and brevity, they are hereinafter referred to as the original claimants and original opponent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The claimants filed Motor Accident Claim Petition Nos. 22, 23, 24 and 25 of 1977 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal No. 2, Ahmedabad (Rural), at Narol ('Tribunal' for short, hereinafter) for personal injuries and damages to goods due to a vehicular accident. The accident in question occurred on 17.4.1977, at about 7 a.m. All the four claimants, who are agriculturists, were travelling in the motor truck No. GTG 2311, along with their goods, on the day of the accident. The claimants had, jointly, hired the said motor truck for transporting Manglori roof tiles from Morbi to t...
Tag this Judgment!Surat District Panchayat and anr. Vs. Development Commissioner and anr ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1004
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This petition is filed by Surat District Panchayat and the President of that Panchayat for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing the order passed by the Development Commissioner, respondent No. 1 herein on July 21, 1990, Annexure 'D' to the petition.2. The petitioner No. 1 is the District Panchayat constituted under the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), while the petitioner No. 2 is the President of the said Panchayat. It is the case of the petitioners that in exercise of the powers under Section 131 of the Act, certain committees were constituted by the District Panchayat. It is also their case that the over and above the statutory committees envisaged by Sub-section (1) of Section 131, certain temporary committees for execution of works or scheme can be constituted by the Panchayat and accordingly certain additional committees have been constituted by the District Panchayat. Even though the said action was in accordance...
Tag this Judgment!J.M. Mehta Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR619; (1992)IILLJ282Guj
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of premature retirement of the petitioner on his completing the age of 50 years from the post of Sales Tax Recovery Mamlatdar, Rajkot, in excercise of powers conferred on the Government under the provisions of Rule 161(1) of the Bombay Civil Service Rules, 1959 by order, dated 23rd September 1976. The petitioner is prematurely retired with effect from 31st December 1976. 2. The facts giving rise to the Present Petition, briefly stated, are as under :- (i) The petitioner was recruited as Junior Clerk in the office of Collector at Kaira on January 4, 1944, and on his passing departmental examination he was promoted to the post of Aval Karkun in Kaira District. In the year 1965-66 certain allegations were made against the petitioner based on which a criminal complaint was lodged against him. The petitioner was also placed under suspension by order dated November 13, 1967 pursuant to the criminal ...
Tag this Judgment!Koli Mansukh Rana Vs. Patel Natha Ramji
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ772; (1992)1GLR37; (1995)IIILLJ669Guj
Bhatt, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the learned Judge, Labour Court & Ex-officio Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Rajkot, ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter) in W. C. (N. F.) Application No. 14 of 1981, by invoking the aids of the provisions of section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act' for short, hereinafter). The appellant is the original applicant/workman and the respondent herein is the original opponent/employer. Therefore, they are hereinafter referred to as 'workman' and 'employer' for the sake of convenience and brevity.2. The workman claimed compensation of Rs. 16,128/- for personal accidental injuries sustained by him when he was attending sugar-cane crushing machine, on 10-2-1981. The workman was earning monthly wages of Rs. 330/-. On the day of the accident, his right hand was crushed in the said crushing machine, which resulted into the permanent partial disablement to the extent of 60%. The workman...
Tag this Judgment!Chunigar Umraogar Gosai Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR949
A.N. Divecha, J.1. Will it is necessary for the detaining authority to take recourse to the Prevention of Black-marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (the Act of 1980 for brief) for the purpose of preventing a person from indulging into objectionable or offending activities with respect to blackmarketing and maintenance of supply of essential commodities when such person can be prevented from indulging into such activities by resorting to the ordinary law in that regard? This is one of the several questions arising before us in this Writ Petition filed by the detenu under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for challenging the legality and validity of the detention order passed by respondent No. 1 on 31st October, 1990 at Annexure 'A' to this petition under Section 3 of the Act of 1980.2. It appears that the petitioner held licence No. 29 issued to him under the relevant provisions contained in the Essential Commodities (Licence, Control and Decl...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »