Gujarat Court July 1991 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.
Kishorlal Prabhudas Ghiya Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-11-1991
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1390
S.D. Shah, J.1. By judgment and order, dated 24-1-1989 the appellate Tribunal exercising powers under Section 33 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 dismissed the appeal of the present petitioner and confirmed the order passed by the competent authority declaring 1590.49 Sq. Mts. of lands as excess vacant land. This petition is directed against the said two orders.2. The present petitioner and respondent No. 3 jointly purchased Plot No. 9 of S. No. 329/384 admeasuring 3852 Sq. Mts. situated at Gondal Road, Rajkot. With respect to these parcels of lands application under Section 20 was made for exemption to use the said parcels of land for industrial purpose, but the said application was rejected.3. Mr. P.V. Hathi, learned Advocate for petitioner submits firstly that the competent authority as well as the appellate authority erred in holding that the petitioner and the respondent No. 3 constitute a body of persons so as to be entitled to hold one unit only. Mr. Hathi reli...
Ramchandra Hirachand Bhatia and anr. Vs. Chunilal Khodidas and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Guj175; (1992)1GLR294
ORDER1. In this landlord tenant litigation the petitioners tenants herein have challenged the judgment and decree passed by the learned 4th Extra Assistant Judge Rajkot, on 3 1 st July, 1984, in Civil Appeal No. 166 of 1981 dismissing the petitioners' appeal, confirming the judgment and decree for possession passed by the trial Court, namely, the Small Causes Court at Raikot in Civil Suit No. 787 of 1979 and further passing a decree for the amount of Rs. 1772.70 by way of municipal taxes allowing the cross-objections of the respondents.2. The facts in brief are as under:The petitioners are the brothers and they faced the aforesaid Civil Suit No. 787 of 1979 (old Civil Suit No. 574 of 1979) filed by the respondents on the grounds that the petitioners were separate in all respect, that the petitioner No. 1 had taken on lease one block on ground floor of the property in question and described herein as 'the suit premises' at a monthly rent RS 200/- for his residence, that the block consis...
Bhailalbhai Trikambhai Vs. Kantilal Devchand Shah and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-1991
Reported in: AIR1993Guj1; (1992)1GLR277
ORDERC.V. Jani, J.1. This revision application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the original judgment-debtor against the judgment and order of the learned District Judge, Broach, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 47/85 confirming the order of the learned Civil Judge (JD), Valia, District Broach, overruling the objections of the judgment-debtor regarding the executability of a consent decree passed in Regular, Civil Suit No. 8/71 arises from a long-drawn, litigation between the parties. The following are the relevant facts.2. The applicant Bhailalbhai Trikambhai had been occupying the property as a tenant. After serving the requisite statutory notice the opponents filed Regular Civil Suit No. 8/71 against the applicant on 6-2-71 for recovering possession of the sit premises on the ground of arrears of rent from 1-9-67 to 1-4-68 and also for recovering arrears of rent as well as mesne profits up to 30-12-1970. After about 5 years, the parties arrived at a compromise an...
K.B. Dantwala and anr. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and anr ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-1991
Reported in: (1992)1GLR265
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners seek a declaration that the impugned action of the respondents treating the absence of the petitioners on 1st September, 1980 as an extraordinary leave on loss of pay was unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 31 of the Constitution and therefore void. They have sought an order for permanently restraining the respondents from implementing the order directing the wages for the day of absence to be deducted on the principle of 'no work no pay'. Though the petitioners had prayed for granting permission to them for filing and prosecuting this Special Civil Application in a representative capacity, it appears that no such permission was granted.2. The petitioners were serving as Development Officers in the Life Insurance Corporation of India, the respondent No. 1 and were members of the National Federation of Insurance Field Workers of India. On July 24, 1980, the General Secretary of the said Trade Union issued a Circular calling ...
Dharamdas Babubhai Kansara and ors. Vs. G.R. Rao and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-10-1991
Reported in: (1994)1GLR337
J.D. Shah, J.1. The petitioners by this petition challenge the order passed by the competent authority under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act,' dated 19-4-1980 as confirmed by the appellate authority under Section 33 of the said Act by its judgment and order, dated 30th August, 1980.2. Relevant facts giving rise to the present petition are as under:(i) Deceased Babubhai Narottam Kansara and his wife Jashkorbai purchased a parcel of land bearing S. No. 205 admeasuring 2 Acres 44 Gunthas equal to 11433 Sq. Mts. by Registered Sale deed, dated 19th January, 1961. Said Babubhai Narottam Kansara expired on 23rd July, 1970 leaving behind him his widow Jashkorbai and six major sons who are petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 herein and two major daughters who are petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 herein. His widow Jashkorbai expired on 17th September, 1979.(ii) The Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 came into force in the State of Gujarat on 17th Februa...
Gujarat Housing Board Vs. Navnirman Mazoor Bandhkam Sahakari Mandli Lt ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-09-1991
Reported in: (1992)1GLR155
M.S. Parikh, J.1. The petitioner filed Civil Suit No. 328 of 1985, Civil Suit No. 329 of 1985 and Civil Suit No. 330 of 1985 against the respondent for obtaining relief of damages on the allegation that respondent committed breach of the contract between the parties. In all the 3 suits the respondent-defendent gave applications as per the particulars appearing in the respective orders for raising the issue of limitation as a preliminary issue. The applications given for raising preliminary issue in the respective suits came to be granted by the trial Court which ordered the issue of limitation to be raised as a preliminary issue. It is against the said orders that the petitioner has come in revision before this Court in the respective revision applications.2. Heard the learned Advocates. Mrs. K.A. Mehta, learned Advocate for the petitioner referred to the provision contained in Order 14 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure which reads as under:2. Court to pronounce judgment on all iss...
Jayant Extraction Industries Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: [1992]85STC3(Guj)
A.P. Ravani, J.1. This is a reference under section 69 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. The applicant is a registered dealer and it also holds recognition under section 32 of the Act. It manufactures groundnut oil, solvent extraction groundnut oil and hydrogenated vegetable oil. For manufacturing hydrogenated vegetable oil (popularly known as vegetable ghee), it uses (a) solvent extracted oil obtained from the oil-cakes, (b) groundnut oil extracted from oil-seeds purchased by it, and (c) other edible oil including groundnut oil purchased from the market. There are certain purchases of oil made from unrecognised dealers. Some purchases are from registered dealers against declaration in form 19. The end-product, i.e., vegetable ghee, is sold in the State and is also sold in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. Certain part of the vegetable ghee is also consigned to places outside the State for sale there. 2. The Sales Tax Officer while making the assessment for samvat year 20...
Dilipsinhji D. Rathod Vs. Vijaysinh Parmar
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-04-1991
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1307
S.D. Shah, J.1. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Information Assistant in the pay-scale of Rs. 425-700/- on probation for a period of one year vide order, dated 30th July, 1984. He resumed his duties on 7th August, 1984 and as per the order of his appointment the period of probation expired on 6th August, 1985. It is required to be noted that in absence of rules providing to the contrary, simply because period of probation expired, the petitioner did not become a regular employee permanently absorbed and so long as he was not confirmed he continued to be a probationer.2. On 19th December, 1985 the respondent communicated to the petitioner adverse remarks for the period commencing from 7th August, 1984 to 31st March, 1985. The said adverse remarks are reproduced hereinbelow:New appointment'. 'But because of enthusiam to learn to work if he works with more attention his performance would be far better as he is possessed of such capability.By that very letter, dated 19th Decemb...
Bhavabhai Bhadabhai Maru Vs. Dhandhuka Nagar Panchayat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-02-1991
Reported in: (1991)2GLR1339
S.D. Shah, J.1. 'Fiat justitia, ruat caelum' Let justice be done, though the heavens should fall. 'Let justice be done' was the sole cry of this Harijan sweeper, a thinly fleshed skeleton with folded hands entreated for mercy before mighty autocratic employer and unfortunately this employer-Dhandhuka Nagar Panchayat acted in the same manner as Emperor Piso acted while wrongly applying this 'Fiat Justitia'. How wrongly the phrase was used by Piso is quoted by Lord Denning in his book 'THE FAMILY STORY' in following words:In my coat of arms, I took as my motto, Fiat justitia-Let justice be done believing it to have a respectable origin. I have since discovered that it was first used to excuse the most outrageous injustice. It comes from a story told by Seneca. Piso sentenced a soldier to death for the murder of Gaius. He ordered centurion to execute the sentence. When the soldier was about to be executed, Gaius came for-ward himself alive and well. The centurion reported it to Piso. He s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›