Gujarat Court July 1990 Judgments
Sabbirbhai Yakubbhai Shaikh and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-31-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR226
M.B. Shah, J.1. In Sessions Case No. 69 of 1987 by the judgment and order dated 29th September, 1987 passed by the Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad, the appellants-original accused Nos. 1, 5 and 6 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months.2. Accused Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 7 are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to suffer R.I. far life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months but they are acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Accused No. 5 is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code for causing injuries by spear to witnesses Mahammad Yamin, Abdulrazak and Mahammad Ismail and is sentenc...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrakant Bhailal Patel Vs. T.V. Krishnamurthy and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Guj63
ORDER1. The petitioner challenges the orders passed by the respondents Nos. I and 2 at Annexures C and D respectively on the ground that they are without jurisdiction and these authorities could not have refused the further leasing of the Well to the petitioner since the Well in question was not vested in the Panchayat by the Government. According to the petitioner, the Resident Deputy Collector had acted within his jurisdiction in granting further lease for a period of 7 years to the petitioner by his order dated 5-5-79. It is also contended that the responsible officers of the Government led the petitioner into a belief that the Well in question had not vested in the Panchayat and had belonged to the Government and that since he had spent huge amount for improvement of the Well, the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 were stopped from passing the impugned orders. It is contended that the impugned orders are arbitrary and violative of the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed by Art. 1...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Thakorlal Keshavlal Rana and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR71
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Who does not know that the practice of 'plea bargaining' under clever camouflage of 'plead guily' is nothing but an outrageous affront to the sense and cause of justice? In fact, it is matter of record that somewhere in the year 1973, on coming to the knowledge of this Court that in large number of food adulteration cases, the accused on pleading guilty, were let off with ridiculously low sentences till rising of the Court and some nominal fine, that the then learned Chief Justice was constrained to issue suo motu notices to all concerned accused calling upon them to show cause as to why their sentences should not be enhanced. Thereafter also the said condemened unfortunate practice quite surprisingly and shockingly persists in complete defiance of the provisions of the statute itself and observations made by the higher Courts in their reported judgments. Rather experience whispers in ears that such 'plea bargaining' practies have become recurring feature particularly...
Tag this Judgment!State of Gujarat Vs. Sthanakvasi JaIn Mota Sangh and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-25-1990
Reported in: (1992)1GLR19; (1995)IIILLJ519Guj
Vaidya, J. 1. The question of importance that arises for consideration in these two acquittal appeals is 'whether the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder, viz. Gujarat Minimum Wages Rules, 1961 (for short 'the Rules') are applicable to any philanthropic institutions like the one in the instant case carrying on exclusively charitable activities of distributing the foodgrains through a fair price shop run by it to fellow members of the community and that too at cheaper rates without any profit motive'? 2. To briefly summarise the prosecution case, Mr. S.R. Bodat, Minimum Wages Inspector, Rajkot, on 30-10-1980 visited the fair price shop run by Sthanakvasi Jain Mota Sangh (for short accused No. 1- Sangh) situated at 9, Diwanpara, Rajkot. At that time Shri J.M. Doshit, President of the said accused No. 1-Sangh (for short-accused No. 2) was present. On making on the spot inspection, it was found out that the accused No. 1-Sangh had c...
Tag this Judgment!Balubhai Jethabhai Shah Vs. Chhaganbhai Bamanbhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-25-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Guj85; (1991)1GLR60
ORDER1. This group of 3 petitions raises common questions of law and facts and can be conveniently dealt with together. The petitioners have, in all these 3 matters, challenged the orders of the respondent No. 2, District Registrars of Co-operative Societies and Appellate Authority whereby the orders issuing certificates under Section 8(3) of the Gujarat Rural Debtors Relief Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) by the Debt Settlement Officer, in favour of the first respondents were confirmed.2. Before dealing with the various legal contentions in these matters, the facts of each of these petitions may be set out.3. In Special Civil Application No. 788 of 1980, the respondent No. 1, who had made an application for obtaining relief under the said Act in respect of his debt of Rs. 3,000/ -, stated that he had mortgaged the land in favour of the petitioner and that since he was a marginal farmer his debt should be discharged. The Debt Settlement Officer came to the conclusion th...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Rafik Husseinmiya Thakore and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and o ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-24-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR159
M.B. Shah, J.The petitioners have prayed as under:(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the provisions of the [Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention)] Act are illegal, ultra vires, void and inoperative;(b) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Prohibition or a Writ in the nature of prohibition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing the respondents to forbear and desist from applying Section 3 or any other provisions of the Act in the case and to reconsider the bail application by deleting Section 3 of the 'TADA' Act;(c) That such other and further reliefs as may be deemed fit in the circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.At the outset, Mr. Pathan, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, stated that the petitioners are not pressing their first prayer that the provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'TADA' Act) are illegal and ultra ...
Tag this Judgment!Fire Service Staff Association Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-24-1990
Reported in: (1990)2GLR1332
C.V. Jani, J.1. Letters Patent Appeal No. 198 of 1990 and Letters Patent Appeal No. 199 of 1990 both arise from an interim order passed by the learned single Judge of this High Court in Special Civil Application No. 3140 of 1990. The Division Bench passed the following order inter alia. 'That when both this L.P.As. are taken up for hearing today we find that it is better and convenient that Special Civil Application No. 3140 of 1990 itself is disposed of finally instead of hearing L.P.As. for admission.... We would like to post the main Special Civil Application No. 3140 of 1990 and also the Special Civil Application No. 3569 of 1990 filed by the respondent No. 4 in the L.P.As. which also pertains to the same question.... In view of this arrangement made, both the Special Civil Applications are posted for final disposal before the learned single Judge specially for the purpose of hearing these two Special Civil Applications on 20th July, 1990'. This order was passed by the Division Ben...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Shantaben and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-1990
Reported in: II(1991)ACC594; 1991ACJ631
N.B. Patel, J.1. The original opponent Nos. 3 and 2 (insurer and insured) of Motor Accident Claim Application No. 73 of 1978 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal No. 4, Ahmedabad, have preferred this appeal against the award passed by the Tribunal in favour of the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 (original applicants), whereby the said respondents are awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/-together with running interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realisation and the entire costs of the petition. It may be noted that the award is passed against respondent No. 7 (original opponent No. 1, driver) also, but as she has not joined in filing the appeal, she is put up as formal respondent.2. The accident in question occurred on 25.1.1975 in broad daylight at about 3.45 or 4.00 p.m. on a big road in the city of Ahmedabad, namely, the road on which Navrangpura Stadium abuts. As a result of this accident, the husband of the claimant No...
Tag this Judgment!Parmar Govind Jesang Vs. Parmar Ajmal Arjan and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-19-1990
Reported in: (1991)1GLR34
C.V. Jani, J.1. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order of the Debt Settlement Officer, Surendranagar, scaling down the respondent's debt to Rs. 1,400/- payable in 10 equal instalments and confirming the order of the appellate authority dated 18-7-1979.The following facts emerge from the impugned order as well as the petition:The respondent No. 1-Parmar Ajmal Arjan of village Rampara, Taluka Wadhwan, District Surendranagar, submitted an application as a small farmer under Section 6(1) of the Gujarat Rural Debtors' Relief Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for setting his debt of Rs. 16,000/-. Necessary notices were served and statements were recorded by the Debt Settlements Officer. According to the respondent, his father left three heirs, namely the respondent, his brother and sister in joint possession of 34 acres and 5 gunthas of land in village Rampara. It appears from Annexure 'H' that the respondent and ...
Tag this Judgment!Rallis India Ltd. Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-17-1990
Reported in: 1991(34)ECC59; 1992(61)ELT237(Guj)
P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J. 1. Rule. Mr. Ajmera waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. The Special Civil Application is for quashing the order at Annexure-'L' which is at page 66 of the Special Civil Application. Even by the order at Annexure-L the Additional Collector of Central Excise and Customs has held as follows : 'In view of the above discussion, I hold that even though on merits freight, secondary packing, trade discount and sales tax are admissible for deduction from the assessable value, in the absence of documentary evidence for the same, it is not possible to quantify the expenses and to work out the amount of refund claims for the period for which the refund claims are within the time under Section 11B of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The exact nature of the interest on book debts would have come out only on perusal of the Balance Sheet of Rallis India where reportedly these would appear and a view regarding admissibility of the same for deduction cannot ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »