Gujarat Court April 1992 Judgments
Hemantkumar Vinodchandra Sukhadia Vs. Paruben
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-30-1992
Reported in: I(1992)DMC614
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. By this appeal under Section 28(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 ('Act' for short hereinafter), the appellant original petitioner has challenged the judgment and decree passed in Hindu Marriage petition No. 3 of 1988 on 21/3/1991 by District Court, Valsad, Navsari.2. A few relevant facts giving birth to the present appeal may, shortly, be stated at the outset.3. The present appellant is the original petitioner-husband and the respondent is the original petitioner No. 2-wife, who were hereinafter adressed to as 'Husband' and 'wife' for the sake of convenience and brevity. Both of them made a joint application under Section 13-B of the Act for mutual divorce. The parties arc Hindu. Their marriage was performed on 27/2/1977 as per Hindu rites, at Navsari. Two daughters were born out of the said wedlock. One daughter Niyanta was born on 18/6/1978 and second daughter Nikita was born on 5/4/1980. Both of them, i.e. husband and wife, are serving at different places. There wa...
Tag this Judgment!Arvind Natvarlal Soni Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-1992
Reported in: (1993)1GLR96
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. (Rule. Mr. D.N. Patel, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the respondent-State waives service of the Rule. Heard Mr. P.D. Shah, the learned Advocate appearing for the. petitioner and Mr. D.N. Patel, the learned A.P.P.)The petitioner-Arvind Natvarlal Soni, who came to be arrested in connection with C. R. No. 335 of 1983, registered at Junagadh City Police Station for the alleged offence punishable under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (for short 'Prohibition Act'), on the charge of having been found in possession of 'chalam' (pipe) and 'charas' weighing 0.5 grams, which subsequently came to be modified and substituted as offence punishable under Section 27(a) of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'Narcotics Act'), has by this Application moved this Court for getting himself released on bail, challenging the impugend judgment and order, dated 3-4-1992, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Junagadh, whereby his bail appl...
Tag this Judgment!Shamjibhai Manjibhai Patel Vs. Commissioner of Police and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-29-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1360
S.D. Dave, J.1. The petitioner-detenu Samjibhai Manjibhai Patel, by filing the present Habeas Corpus Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the orders of detention pronounced by the Commissioner of Police, City of Ahmedabad, respondent No. 1 herein, Annexure 'A' dtd. 26th September, 1991, saying that, the petitioner-detenu requires to be preventively detained under the provisions of PASAA 1985.2. The orders of detention dated 26th September, 1991 and the grounds of detention bearing even date have been duly furnished to the petitioner-detenu. The reference to the grounds of detention would go to show that nowhere it has been stated that the petitioner-detenu is a 'dangerous person' within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the PASAA 1985. Any how, the mention of certain criminal cases registered against the petitioner-detenu and the recital in respect of certain statements recorded by the Sponsoring Authority would go to show that the petitioner-detenu has been...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Chemicals Private Ltd. Vs. Krishna Singh Sata Singh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-28-1992
Reported in: II(1993)ACC160; 1993ACJ218; AIR1993Guj121
Shah, J.1. At 1.30 p.m. on July 21, 1982, an automobile collision occurred within the Indian Petrochemicals Limited ('IPCL' for short) campus near Baroda. In the collision, two vehicles were involved. One was a scooter bearing registration No. BHCI206 of the ownership of respondent No. 1 --Krishna Singh Sata Singh, and the same, at the time of collision was driven by that respondent No. 1. The other vehicle was an ambassador car bearing registration No. GTH 5198 which belonged to the appellant herein, and was being driven by the driver of the appellant. In that ambassador car, certain persons were travelling. As a result of the accident, respondent No. 1 suffered some injuries. He sustained a fracture of the left femur bone, and he also sustained some other injuries. Some of the passengers travelling in that ambassador car also sustained some injuries. The car was also damaged; so also was damaged the scooter.2. Before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Vadodara, five compensation ...
Tag this Judgment!Ciba Geigy Ltd. Vs. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-27-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1053
Thakkar, J. 1. This appeal is filed against an order passed by the Second Extra Assistant Judge, Baroda below application Exh. 5 on April 20, 1992 in Trade Mark Suit No. 1 of 1992. The appellants are the original plaintiffs and the respondent is the original defendant. The appellants-plaintiffs filed a suit in the District Court at Baroda being Trade Mark Suit No. 1 of 1992 for permanent injunction restraining the respondent defendant from using in any manner in relation to pharmaceutical or medicinal preparations, the impugned trade mark CLOFRANIL or any other distinctly similar trade mark so as to infringe the trade mark registered in favour of the plaintiff No. 1 bearing No. 233145 under the style of ANAFRANIL. Alongwith the plaint, the plaintiffs filed an application Exh. 5 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code Civil Procedure, 1908 for interim relief. The Assistant Judge, Baroda by an order dt. April 3, 1992 issued notice to the defendant and granted ex-parte ad-interim relief ...
Tag this Judgment!Valjibhai Ranchhodbhai Patel Vs. Commissioner of Police and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-24-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1538
N.J. Pandya, J.1. These two matters have come before us by way of reference from the Division Bench consisting of Justices K.J. Vaidya & S.D. Dave. The said Division Bench was taking up detention matters and in the course thereof, was dealing with the aforesaid two Special Criminal Applications where the detenus were under preventive detention as per the provisions of Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act popularly known as PASA. It was urged on behalf of the detenus that the detaining authorities have not considered any other less drastic measure and therefore, the detention suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. To this counter was advanced on behalf of the respondent-State in two fold manner, Firstly, it was urged that, by its very nature, detention under PASA cannot have, as an alternative, any measure less or otherwise and secondly, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, and with pointed attention to the detention order itself, what has been missing is r...
Tag this Judgment!HafijuddIn FazluddIn Kazi Vs. Commissioner of Police and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-23-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1332
S.D. Dave, J.1. Hafijuddin Kazi the petitioner-detenu herein challenges, by way of filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the orders of detention passed by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City, the respondent No. 1 herein, dated 11-9-1991 Annexure 'A', saying that the petitioner-detenu is a dangerous person within the meaning of PASAA, 1985 and that, therefore, he requires to be preventively detained under the same. The orders under challenge dated 11-9-1991 at Annexure 'A' have been duly furnished to the petitioner-detenu.2. The grounds of detention would show that a singular crime, namely C.R. No. 168 of 1991 was registered at the Ellisbridge Police Station on 15-3-1991 for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 365, 342, 506(1) and under Section 114 of Indian Penal Code. The grounds of detention, do further go to show that because of the registration of the above said offences at the Ellisbridge Police Station agai...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Ravjibhai Patel Vs. Thakkarbapa Nagar Gram Panchayat and a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-22-1992
Reported in: (1993)2GLR1605
Divecha, J.1. Can the services of a Panchayat employee be terminated simply on the ground that a criminal case has been filed against him Where specific power of suspension during pendency of a criminal trial is conferred on a Panchayat, is it desirable on its part to resort to termination of service on the ground of pendency of a criminal trial against its servants? These are the main questions arising in this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The facts giving rise to this petition move in a narrow compass. The petitioner was appointed as a Clerk in the 1st respondent-Panchayat with effect from 1st July, 1980. It appears that there was a raid by the Anti-Corruption Bureau on 24th May, 1984 in the office of the 1st respondent-Panchayat. The petitioner and one Rasulbhai Nabibhai Momin serving as Talati-cum-Mantri were charged with the offences punishable under Secs. 161 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the Code' for brief) and Section 5(2) of ...
Tag this Judgment!Makwana Sambhubhai Chethabhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-21-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1291
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. Rule. Mr. D.N. Patel, Asstt. Public Prosecutor waives service of Rule.2. This is an application under Section 439(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code by the petitioner who has been accused of the offence of murder. It appears that the applicant had earlier made similar application to the Sessions Court, Bhavnagar, and by a reasoned order dated 10th December, 1991, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar had rejected the petitioner's application being Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 819 of 1991. The main accusation levelled against the petitioner is that, on the day of the incident, he had dealt axe blows to Raghav and as a result of the axe blow given to him on his head, Raghav died. According to the version emanating from F.I.R and other police papers, three persons had accosted Raghav who was going on a motor-cycle and way-laid him inflicting injuries with various weapons resulting in his death.3. It was submitted by the learned Counsel appearing ...
Tag this Judgment!Chandrakant Chimanlal Shah Vs. Chimanlal Ambalal Shah and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Apr-16-1992
Reported in: (1992)2GLR1411
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned order of the learned City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad, passed on 18th July, 1989 rejecting the application at Exh. 163 made by the petitioner-original defendant No. 1 requesting the Court that defendant No. 2 may be called upon to adduce the oral evidence in view of the fact that defendant No. 2 was supporting the plaintiff's case.2. At the hearing of this Revision Application, the petitioner, who has appeared as party in person has not disputed the fact that respondent No. 2, i.e., the defendant No. 2 was supporting his case. There is no dispute about the fact that the respondent No. 2 had filed written statement supporting the case of the plaintiff challenging the validity of the decree passed in H. M.P. No. 141 of 1976. It is in the above background and the admitted fact that the question whether the respondent No. 2 should be asked to lead her evidence before the respondent No. 1 has to be decided. In Hiralal v. M.G. ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »