Gujarat Court December 1990 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.
Panatar Arvindbhai Ratilal Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-07-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR451
N.J. Pandya, J.1. There is a checkered history to an offence registered with 'A' Division Police Station, Jamnagar in its Crime Register No. 42 of 1986. As the Police did not initiate any investigation for a period of about eight months or so, the approached the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on or about 20-4-1987 and obtained certain orders of investigation. Thereafter the local Police of Jamnagar also initiated inquiry and at the end, they submitted report on 9-6-1987 and sought 'C' summary. The complainant-present petitioner objected to it and while hearing the report as to 'C' summary, the learned Magistrate allowed the proposed accused and the complainant also to be heard against which the petitioner filed Criminal Revision Application No. 115 of 1987 in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar. The learned Sessions Judge agreed with the petitioner and over-ruled the decision of the learned Magistrate allowing the accused to make submission. There were about seven accused,...
Rajai Tirathdas Rupchand and Co. Vs. Laxmanbhai Vensimal Rajai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1204
N.J. Pandya, J.1. The Appeal arises out of an order passed below Exh. 5 of Regular Civil Suit No. 2 of 1990 of the Court of District Judge, Bhavnagar. The suit was filed in connection with a registered mark and as such, as the Court of first instance, it was entertained by the District Court at Bhavnagar and the learned District Judge himself dealt with the matter. In plaint Exh. 1 prayers were to the effect that the registered mark No. 255198 may not be made use of by the defendant-respondent and they may be restrained from doing so and a declaration in that regard was sought to the effect that the defendant had no right title or interest whatsoever over the said trade mark. Though the plaint is in Gujarati in the prayer clause 'without jurisdiction' words are used about the alleged action on the part of the defendant-respondent to use the said trade mark.2. Along with the plaint, application for ad-interim injunction was given at Exh. 5. The suit was filed on 11-10-1990. On account o...
Suresh Jugalkishore and ors. Vs. Superintendent, Central Prison and or ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-06-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR708
R.A. Mehta, J.1. The petitioners are undertrial prisoners in Sabarmati Central Prison, Ahmedabad. They have two grievances, namely: (1) not allowing them to keep their private tiffin in their barrack at night, and (2) surprise search and seizure during night hours.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that these are the elementary rights of human existence to have food and peaceful sleep at night and the Jail authorities are depriving them of these elementary rights which constitute personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners submit that as undertrial prisoners, they are entitled and (should be) permitted to have their food from outside twice in a day and the petitioners should be free in the Jail to take their food at the time of their choice at any time and they should be allowed to keep the same with them in the barrack and they cannot be compelled to take their food at the time fixed for the convict prisoners.3. As r...
Baria Guman Hamji and anr. Vs. Rajanikant J. Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1990
Reported in: 1992ACJ740; (1992)1GLR7; (1993)IIILLJ240Guj
Bhatt, J. 1. By this appeal, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act' for short, hereinafter), the appellants, who are heirs of the deceased victim of an employment injuries, have challenged the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter), at Nadiad, on 5-5-1981, in Workmen's Compensation Case No. 25 of 1978. In order to appreciate the merits of this appeal and challenge against it, it would be necessary to set out material and relevant facts giving rise to the present appeal.2. The present appellants are the original applicants and the present respondent is the original opponent. They are, hereinafter, referred to as the 'applicants' and 'opponent' for the sake of convenience and brevity.3. The applicants, who are the parents of the deceased victim of an employment accident, claimed compensation of Rs. 18,000/- stating that their son died on account of injuries sustained by him out of a...
Baria Guman Hamji and anr. Vs. Rajnikant J. Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1990
Reported in: I(1993)ACC226
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this appeal, under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act for short, hereinafter), the appellants, who are heirs of the deceased victim of employment injuries, have challenged the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation ('Commissioner' for short, hereinafter), at Nadiad, on 5.5.1981, in Workmen's Compensation Case No. 25 of 1978. In order to appreciate the merits of this appeal and challenge against it, it would be necessary to set out matehal and relevant facts giving rise to the present appeal.2. The present appellants are the original applicants and the present respondent is the original opponent. They are, hereinafter, referred to as the 'applicants' and 'opponent' for be sake of convenience and brevity.3. The applicants, who are the parents of the deceased victim of an employment accident, claimed compensation of Rs. 18,000/-, stating that their son died on account of injuries sustained by him out of an...
Sadiq Rami Gulam HusseIn Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-05-1990
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1009
R.A. Mehta, J.1. These two cross-appeals arise from same judgment in Sessions Case No. 122 of 1990 of Ahmedabad City Sessions Court. The appeal filed by the State is in respect of the acquittal of the accused foran offence punishable under Section 307 of I.P.C. and the appeal filed by the accused is against conviction and sentence for offence under Section 397 read with Section 324 & 394 of I.P.C.2. The prosecution case is that at about 3 O'clock in the mid-night of 16th December, 1989, the accused committed theft and robbery in Railway compartment by stealing a suit-case of one Kanchanben when her husband Sohanlal caught the accused who was carrying the stolen suit-case in the said Railway compartment, the accused put down the suit-case and gave knife blows to Sohanlal in the abdomen and near left eye. His wife and his brother (complainant) were there and members of the public had also gathered and the accused was caught there and then red-handed with the blood-stained knife. After th...
Jaybharat Saw Mill Vs. Babulal Ambalal Sodh-parmar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1990
Reported in: 1991ACJ793; (1991)1GLR446; (1992)IILLJ186Guj
1. By this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act' for short, hereinafter), the appellant has challenged the judgment and award passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.) and Ex-Officio Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation at Nadiad on July 30, 1983 in a Workmen's Compensation Case No. 37 of 1982. 2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal may be shortly stated at the outset. The present appellant is the original opponent and the present respondent is the original claimant. They are, hereinafter, referred to as original claimant and original opponent for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The original claimant filed an application for compensation of Rs. 23,900/- for personal injuries sustained by him while working as a labourer in a saw mill of original opponent. Original opponent was the owner of the saw mill and the original claimant was a labourer of the opponent under the provisions of the Act. The original claimant contended that he was wo...
Govind Transport Company and ors. Vs. Chunaki Alias Thanki and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-04-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC179; 1991ACJ801
S.D. Dave, J.1. This First Appeal filed by the owners of the motor truck No. GTE 8685 arises out of the judgment and award pronounced by the learned M.A.C.T., Vadodara in a group of matters decided on 29th January, 1979, awarding the total compensation of Rs. 43,500/- to one of the injured applicants, Bai Chunaki and exonerating the insurer on the ground that the injured was an unauthorised passenger in the goods vehicle and that at the relevant time the motor truck involved in the accident was being driven by a person who was not holding a valid licence to drive.2. Bai Chunaki Virla had filed the M.A.C. Petition No. 201 of 1977 in the court of M.A.C.T. at Vadodara against seven opponents. The opponent No. 1 is the driver of the motor truck involved in the accident. The original opponent No. 2 was joined in the capacity of a conductor/a cleaner attached to the abovesaid motor truck. The opponent No. 3, the firm and opponent Nos. 4, 5 and 6, the partners of the firm, were joined in the ...
Stadfast Paper Mills Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1990
Reported in: 1991(34)ECC62; 1993LC306(Gujarat); 1992(61)ELT29(Guj)
M.B. Shah, J.1. The petitioner Company is a manufacturer of different types of wrapping and packing papers falling under Item 17 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. By a Notification No. 45/73, dated 1st March 1973 the Central Government, in exercise of powers under Rule 8 of the Rules, exempted the paper of the varieties described therein, falling under Item 17 of the First Schedule to the Act, cleared by any manufacturer during any financial year upto the quantity prescribed in the Notification from so much of the duty of the excise leviable thereon as was specified in the Table to the Notification. Under the Table on the clearance of paper upto the first 100 metric tonnes the extent of exemption was specified as 75%, on the next 100 metric tonnes of paper cleared the extent of exemption was specified as 25% and on the next 200 metric tonnes the extent of exemption was specified as 15%. 2. By the show cause notice dated 5th May 1977 (Annexure 'C') the pet...
Kantilal Nagarbhai Khristi Vs. Kantibhai Punjabhai Thakor and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-03-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC392; 1991ACJ1037; AIR1991Guj177; (1991)1GLR573
1. Since common questions are involved in both these appeals, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.These two appeals are directed against the judgment and award passed b y the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal ('Tribunal' for short, hereinafter), at Nadiad, on 5-5-1978, in a Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 300/ 77. Thus, the appellants have invoked the provisions of Section I 10-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ('Act' for short, hereinafter).The controversy in these two appeals is circumscribed to a very narrow compass and only the following two points are raised:(i) whether the finding of the Tribunal, exonerating the insurer, is illegal and invalid?(ii) whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is adequate?In order to appreciate merits of these two contentions, 4 would be necessary to set out the relevant facts at the outset.Admittedly, the accident occurred, on 1-6-1977, at about 6.30 a.m., when the injured claimant, Kantibhai Nagarbhai Khristi, appe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »