Gujarat Court March 1994 Judgments
Vihalal Mangaldas Patel Vs. Maiben Vihalal Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Guj88; I(1996)DMC432; (1995)1GLR532
ORDERR.A. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner and the opponent were husband and wife married in the year 1962. In 1971, it appears that they were living in Poona and the wife left him. The husband had filed H.M.P. No. 124 of 1971 in the Civil Court at Poona and an ex parte decree for divorce came to be passed on 12-9-1977. In appeal, the Bombay High Court set aside the decree and remanded the matter. After the remand, again decree for divorce came to be passed on 9-9-1985. The wife preferred M.C.A. No. 57 of 1985 for setting aside that decree. However, the trial court rejected the same, therefore, the wife preferred Misc. Civil Appeal No. 383 of 1989 in the District Court at Poona and applied for interim relief and the appellate court granted stay of the execution of the decree passed by the trial court.2. In the meantime, the wife had filed the Criminal Misc. Application No. 47 of 1989 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code in the Criminal Court at Kalol and by an order dated...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Jayvantiben Wd/O. Sitarambhai Arjanbhai and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1994
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1421
A.P. Ravani, J.1. All these revision applications arise out of order passed in different execution applications by Joint District Judge, Vadodara. In different motor accident claim petitions, it was directed that the amount of compensation as per the award be paid within four months from the date of the award with 6% interest failing which the claimants were entitled to claim interest at the rate of 12%. The period of four months expired on July 31, 1984 inasmuch as the award was dated March 31, 1984. The amount of compensation as directed was tendered by the Union of India, the petitioner herein, by cheque. The cheque of the full amount of compensation was tendered on July 31, 1984. However, the amount was realised on August 27, 1984. In view of this position, the claimants demanded interest for 27 days and filed execution applications. The Trial Court held that the direction given in the award was not complied with inasmuch as cheque was tendered on July 31, 1984. However, as the che...
Tag this Judgment!Ramanlal Punjalal Shah Vs. Pari Bhulabhai Haribhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-31-1994
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1475
K.R. Vyas, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the original defendant of Civil Suit No. 1428 of 1973 which was decided by learned Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad on 28-4-1978 whereby the suit filed by the respondent to recover an amount of Rs. 5,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 9-4-1973 till full and final payment of the amount and costs is decreed.2. The case of the respondent-original plaintiff is that the respondent-original plaintiff is doing banking business at Ahmedabad and the appellant-original defendant is a resident of village Dharisana in Dehgam Taluka, has borrowed an amount of Rs. 5,000/- on March 12, 1970 for the purpose of business and for that purpose, he had given a bearer cheque dated April 10, 1970 which was not sent for payment to the bank at the request of the appellant. However, in spite of repeated demands, as the appellant failed to pay the amount, present suit has been filed.3. In the written statement Exh. 11, the appellant raised a numbe...
Tag this Judgment!Arefabanu Majidkhan Pathan Vs. Mohammad Hanif Hussainmiya and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-30-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2881; (1994)1GLR886
ORDERS.D. Dave, J.1. The learned Magistrate acting under provisions contained under Section 126 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 would award maintenance to a destitute wife and her minor daughter. The Sessions Court in revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code would interfere. The interference is on the broad principle of a custom prevalent in a particular community. The finding of fact rendered by the trial Court is upset on such considerations. This is all what the present. Criminal Revision Application would demonstrate.2. The petitioner wife Arebanu Pathan had approached the Court of learned JMFC Surat by filing the maintenance application No. 8 of 1985 against the husband under the provisions contained in Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. The case taken up by the petitioner-wife against the erring husband was that her marriage with the opponent husband was solemnised on 13-2-1983 according to the Muslim Personal Law and that the opponent husban...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip R. Patel Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-30-1994
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1686
K.R. Vyas, J.1. The petitioner in all these Civil Revision Applications who is either original defendants Nos. 1, 2 or 3 in the five suits being Summary Suits Nos. 5349 of 1990, 4664 of 1990, 4766 of 1990, 4765 of 1990 and 5166 of 1990 have challenged the orders dated 4-3-1993 passed by the learned Chamber Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad granting conditional leave to defend the suit filed by the respondent No. 1 in all these Civil Revision Applications.2. The respondent No. 1 who is the common plaintiff in all the suits has filed the aforesaid suits against the Company or the partnership firm or the sole proprietor concerned and the same has been shown as defendant No. 1 while the defendant No. 2 Dilip Patel and defendant No. 3 Nitin Patel has been shown in each of the suits as Director or a Partner or a sole Proprietor of the concerned defendant No. 1 In substance, the defendants Nos. 2 and 3 are common in all the suits.3. Summary Suit No. 5349 of 1990 has been filed by the respond...
Tag this Judgment!Jayagauri Gokaldas Heirs and Lrs. of Gokaldas and ors. Vs. State of Gu ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-29-1994
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1310
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The common order passed by the Competent Authority at Bhavnagar (respondent No. 2 herein) on 7th July 1984 in U.L.C. Case Nos. 1470, 283, 285, 286 and 126 all of 1976 as affirmed in appeal by the common appellate order passed by the Urban Land Tribunal at Ahmedabad (the Appellate Authority for convenience) on 26th May 1987 in Appeal Nos. Bhavnagar-1318 and 1293 both of 1984 is under challenge in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. By his impugned order, respondent No. 2 declared the combine holding of the petitioners with that of the heirs and legal representative of Vadilal Mohanlal Vasani to be in excess of the ceiling limit by 4749.69 square metres and declared the excess to be surplus for the purposes of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (the Act for brief).2. The facts giving rise to this petition are somewhat complicated and complex. Petitioner No. 1 is the widow of one Gokaldas Prabhudas and petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 are ...
Tag this Judgment!Nabipur Gram Panchayat and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-25-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Guj52
ORDERM.S. Parikh, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner No. 1 -- Nabipur Gram Panchayat by itself and through petitioner No. 2, its Sarpanch, have challenged the resolution of the Executive Committee of Nabipur Taluka Panchayat passed on 3-12-1981 for making construction of huts in the grazing land (Gauchar land) of village Nabipur for providing residence to the village people under the Central Government's rehabilitation Scheme (Annexure C) and the order dated 5-4-1982 passed by the learned Collector, Bharuch for resuming such land from the grazing land (Gauchar land) of village Nabipur, for such rehabilitation.2. Brief facts in so far as the case of the petitioners is concerned are: Nabipur village stood inhabited by about 4,000 people belonging to various creeds including Adivasis and Harijans and other economically backward persons. Most of the village population depends upon agriculture. Land bearing survey No. 1048 in the outskirt of...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Amishkumar Vinodbhai and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1994
Reported in: (1996)3GLR212
J.M. Panchal, J.1. Whether on the death of injured claimant, claim petition filed by him abates or right to sue survives to his heirs and legal representatives, is the question which arises for consideration in this revision application.Deceased Vinodbhai Mangaldas Patel filed a Claim Petition being M.A.G.P. No. 86 of 1988 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 11 (Aux.), Ahmedabad under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939. claiming compensation against the applicant, i.e., Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation Ltd., and opponent No. 5, i.e., Shri Laljibhai Keshavbhai Chaudhari, who was driving the offending bus belonging to the applicant. In the said application, Vinodbhai Patel claimed compensation of Rs. 15 lakhs on account of personal injuries sustained by him as a result of vehicular accident which took place on December 28, 1987 due to rash and negligent driving of S.T. bus by the opponent No. 5.2. During the pendency of the claim petition, the original claima...
Tag this Judgment!Jayantilal Kasalchand Shah Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1994
Reported in: (1995)1GLR592
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The order passed by and on behalf of respondent No. 1 herein on 13th July 1987 under Section 34 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (the Act for brief) is under challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Thereby the order passed by the Competent Authority at Rajkot (respondent No. 2 herein) on 20th October 1983 in U.L.C. Case No. 2128 of 1976 came to be revised and the holding of the petitioner came to be declared excess by 3106.01 square metres and the excess was declared to be surplus.2. The facts giving rise to this petition move in a narrow compass. The petitioner held certain parcels of land in Rajkot. It was beyond the ceiling limit prescribed for that area under the Act. He, therefore, filled in the prescribed form under Section 6(1) thereof. The proceeding came to be registered as U.L.C. Case No. 2128 of 1976. Pursuant thereto, a draft statement was prepared by respondent No. 2 herein and it was caused to be se...
Tag this Judgment!Natvarlal Hiralal Vs. J. Jamnadas and Co. and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-1994
Reported in: (1994)2GLR1268
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 24th December, 1992, passed by the 5th Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Surat, below application Ex. 100, in Regular Civil Suit No. 497 of 1964, by which the document which was produced at Ex. 97 was impounded, holding that it was liable to stamp duty of Rs. 75,590/- and a penalty of Rs. 7,55,900/-.The petitioner instituted the suit for specific performance of an agreement to lease dated 10-3-1983 by directing the respondents to place the petitioner in possession of two floors of the premises bearing Nondh 2509 situated at Ward No. 4, Surat. It appears that during the proceedings the document dated 10-3-1983 was produced and exhibited at Ex. 97. Thereafter, the respondents made application Ex. 100 on 11-8-1992 contending that the document could not be admitted in evidence as it was not registered nor was it properly stamped. The application was contested by the petitioner contending that the said document was only a memo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »