Gujarat Court December 1995 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.
State of Gujarat, Secretary, Home Department and ors. Vs. the Ahmedaba ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1995
Reported in: AIR1997Guj22
1. The appellants (the State of Gujarat and the Inspector General of Prisons) are aggrieved by the ex parte ad-interim order directing the authorities to hand over the possession of the lands within 15 days.2. The original petitioners were owners of original plots No. 177, 178 and 179. Under the final town planning scheme, which came into force in the year 1982, these plots vested in the Authorities and the petitioners were given other lands being plots No. 676, 677 and 678. However, for as may as 12 years, the petitioners were not given possession of these plots. The possession of the original plots of the petitioners was taken long back and a new overbridge has already been constructed on the same.3. Ultimately, the State Government has passed a resolution on 6th December, 1994, Annexure 'J' to the petition, directing that the petitioners be given possession of final plots No. 676, 677 and 678 and the Inspector General of Prisons and the Municipal Authorities were directed to hand ov...
Chimanbhai Becharbhai Parmar and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1995
Reported in: (1996)3GLR54
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioners challenge the order dated 26-5-1981 of the District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Kheda, under which respondents No. 4 and 5 were ordered to be promoted to the post of Deputy Accountant in Accounts Group II. The facts of the case which are necessary for the disposal of the writ petition briefly stated are as under.2. The petitioners were appointed on the post of Computer-operator on 22-10-1972, 5-12-1972 and 15-3-1973 respectively in the office of the District Panchayat, Kheda, It is not in dispute that the recruitment and other service conditions of the servants of Kheda District Panchayat are regulated under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayat Services (Classification and Recruitment) Rules, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 1967'). Under the provisions of the Rules of 1967 two cadres were to be constituted, namely, common clerical cadre and common accounts cadre. Accordingly, vide notification dated 13-5-1977 two cadres were...
Sanjivani Balvant Salasker Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-19-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR580
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Rule. Mr. J.A. Shelat, the learned A.P.P. waives service of the Rule. Earlier, on 14-12-1995, when this matter came up for admission before us, notice was issued to the respondents making it returnable on 16-12-1995 with the following observations:1. Whether any Member of the Legislative Assembly and/or Corporator of Municipal Corporation and for that purpose even anyone elected members of Parliament or Panchayat has any right to recommend 'temporary bail' or 'parole' to the convict-prisoner and indirectly attempt to influence and thereby interfere with the discretion of the Court and for that matter even the discretion of any other statutory authorities? This in short is indeed the most important question that has arisen for our consideration in this case at the admission stage, in the background of the following fact-situations.2. Sanjivani Salasker by this Misc. Criminal Application under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, has moved this Court inter ...
Girishchandra R. Bhatt and anr. Vs. Dineshbhai N. Sanghvi, Principal, ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-18-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR812
S.M. Soni, J.1. Petitioners, Party-in-Person, have prayed for taking necessary action under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act against the respondents for alleged deliberate and wilful non-compliance of the order of the Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short), confirmed by the High Court.2. Few facts necessary to appreciate the contentions raised are as under:One Sanghvi Education Trust, of which respondent No. 2 is the Managing Trustee, is running Sanghvi Primary School, of which respondent No. 1 is the Principal. Principal and Managing Trustee is the same person, viz. Mr. Dineshbhai N. Sanghvi. Respondent No. 3 is the District Education Officer for the city of Ahmedabad. Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 are serving in the said school as Assistant Teachers. Said school is a recognised one under the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947. The management of the said school is liable to pay salary to its teachers, as per the pay and allowances declared for them by the Sta...
Bhadrabala Wd/O. Bhupendra Shelat Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-15-1995
Reported in: (1996)3GLR19
M.R. Calla, J.1. This Special Civil Application is directed against the order dated 14-9-1981 by the Legal Department of the Government of Gujarat in the matter of grant of pension to Shri B.J. Shelat, ex-Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad whereby l/3rd of the pension and l/3rd of the gratuity was sanctioned and 2/3rd amount of pension and the gratuity were deducted under Rule 188 of Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') with effect from 4-12-1973.2. The petitioner was a Judicial Officer and ceased to be in the service on 3-12-1973 on the basis of the voluntary retirement. The present petition was filed on 6-5-1982 and during the pendency of this petition, the petitioner expired on 23-8-1995. Thereupon, an application was moved to bring his widow on record as his heir and legal representative and such application moved by his widow, namely, Bhadrabala on 11-9-1995 was allowed on 12-9-1995 and she was arrayed as the legal heir of the deceased petitio...
Jyotiben Ramlal Purohit and Etc. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1549; (1996)1GLR395
B.C. Patel, J.1. A Division Bench of this Court (Coram : M. B. Shah & B. C. Patel, JJ.) referred this matter to a larger bench as in the view of the Division Bench, the convict under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) cannot be released on parol or bail and consideration of sympathy cannot be permitted to overshadow the consideration regarding security of the Society. Considering the law as discussed in the order of the Division Bench passed on 20th July 1995, it was not possible for the Division Bench to agree with the view expressed by another Division Bench of this Court (Coram: C. K. Thakkar & S. M. Soni, JJ.) in the judgment and order passed on 7th March 1995 in Misc. Criminal Application No. 791 of 1995 in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1994. For deciding the controversy in question, office was directed to place the matter before the learned Chief Justice for placing it before a larger bench and as directed by the learned ...
Gandalal Kababhai Tankaria (Decd.) Through His Heirs Jayaben Vs. Mansu ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: (1996)1GLR759
Y.B. Bhatt, J.1. The present revision is one under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), filed by the original plaintiffs-landlords, wherein the respondent is the original defendant-tenant.2. The landlord had filed a suit for eviction of his tenant on the ground that the tenant was in arrears of rent for more than six months and that he has neglected to make payment of the same inspite of the statutory notice.3. The defendant-tenant contested the suit by filing his written statement at Exh. 13B. While denying the various allegations as regards he being in arrears of rent, he further contended that he was ready, and willing to pay the rent due and further raised a dispute as to standard rent.4. The trial Court framed issues at Exh. 21, wherein one of the issues was as regards the determination of standard rent in respect of the suit premises.5. However, before the issues were raised, the matter took a different turn. The plaintiff filed an app...
Shivabhai Gajmalbhai Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-14-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR64
A.N. Divecha, J.1. The judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Surat in Sessions Case No. 141 of 1988 convicting the appellant herein of the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (the N.D.P.S. Act for brief) and also under Section 66(1)(b) and Section 65E of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (the Prohibition Act for brief) and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs. 1 lakh, in default rigorous imprisonment for 2 years more is under challenge in this appeal at the instance of the original accused.2. It is not necessary to set out in detail the facts giving rise to this appeal. It may be sufficient to note that, while on patrolling duty on 10th February 1988 in the company of the Police Inspector and the Police Sub-Inspector of the Salabatpura Police Station at Surat, Police Head Constable, named, Kaljibhai Bhavjibhai (the complainant for convenience), ...
Goopalbhai Mohanlal Mankadia and ors. Etc. Vs. Punjab National Bank an ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj165; (1996)1GLR514
H.L. Gokhale, J.1. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in Appeal from Order No. 629 of 1995 raised a loan of over Rs. 17 lakhs through three documents and mortgaged two shops to respondent No. 1, Punjab National Bank,some time in the year 1985 for securing the said amount. Not a single paisa has been returned so far and the amount due by now with interest thereon comes to about Rs. 40 lakhs. Respondent No. 1-bank filed three suits on 30th October, 1986 to enforce the mortgage by sale of the property and to recover the money, the three suits being Special Civil Suits Nos. 216, 217 and 218 of 1986 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Rajkot. An order of attachment before judgment concerning these two shops was obtained on 5th May, 1987. Subsequently, preliminary decree was 'obtained on 30th September, 1987 and final decree on 28th December, 1994. Respondent No. 1 filed execution applications on 17th May, 1995 and the proclamation for auction has subsequently been issued in A...
Bai Damiyanti Jayantibhat Sharma and ors. Vs. United India Insurance C ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Dec-13-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR418
S.D. Shah, J.1. Rule. Heard Mrs. Vidhatri K. Parekh for the applicants and Mr. Darshan M. Parikh for the respondent No. 1. For an unfortunate accident that has taken place on 17th of October, 1984, the Tribunal being M.A.C.T. (Main), Surat, has by Award dated 3rd May, 1994 fully allowed the application and awarded the amount of Rs. 2,17,000/- inclusive of interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the claim petition till realisation. The Tribunal has further directed that the amount of Rs. 53,250/- each shall be invested in the name of the applicants in Fixed Deposit Receipts in a Nationalised Bank for a period of 15 years and the name of the Claimant No. 1 shall be shown as guardian of the rest of the claimants. It is an unfortunate state of affairs in the State of Gujarat that for an accident that has taken place as back as 1984, the compensation petition is heard and decided in the year 1994, i.e., exactly after a decade. To add to the agony of the claimants, the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »