Gujarat Court June 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.
Smt. Laxmiben Mavjibhai and anr. Vs. Shankarbhai Mulubhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1320
S.D. Shah, J.1. This landlords' revision application under Section 29(2) of Bombay Rents, Hotel & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 is against concurrent judgment of two Courts below whereby the Courts have refused the decree of eviction in favour of the landlords and against the respondent-tenant.2. In order to properly appreciate the submissions made by Miss V.P. Shah, learned Counsel for the landlords, the relevant facts giving rise to the present revision application are stated hereinafter briefly:(i) The landlords instituted Reg. C.S. No. 1089 of 1971 which came to be renumbered as Rent Suit No. 638 of 1977 on the establishment of the Court of Small Causes at Surat. The suit was filed for recovery of possession of the premises bearing No. 1598 situated in Ward No. 8 in Gopipura, Surat inter alia contending that the defendant-tenant was a tenant of two rooms on the ground floor of the said building at a monthly rent of Rs. 20/- and Rs. 4/- per month towards municipal taxes. Tha...
V.K. Bhatt, Provident Fund Inspector Vs. Aryodaya Ginning Mills Limite ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: (1996)2GLR38
K.J. Vaidya, J.1. Once again the very same squalid, shocking, disgraceful and disgusting old tale of woe and pity, of fraud and the dereliction of duty, the patent modus operandi being that of the illicit 'plea-bargaining' between the learned Magistrate and the accused, resulting into the gross miscarriage of justice ! ! Once again the law and justice appears to have been perversely made to divorce against their will in the matter of statutory minimum sentence, in total defiance on the one hand of the Law on the point of minimum sentence being crystal clear, and on the other hand of the Courts, i.e., High Courts and the Supreme Court, repeatedly deprecating this unholy practice of 'plea-bargaining', the same is not given up !! If despite the High Court and the Apex Court of the country deprecating the said practice of illicit 'plea-bargaining' as illegal and unconstitutional in unmistakable terms which is even otherwise first and elementary thing, duty, principle to be known, scrupulou...
Kantibhai Valabhai Patel and ors. Vs. PravIn Nathubhai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-19-1995
Reported in: 1997ACJ243; AIR1996Guj130
1. This appeal by the original opponents is directed against the award of Rs 1,99,000/- with proportionate cost and 12% interest. The appeal is restricted to Rs. 1,00,000/-. The break up of the award is as follows:Rs. 50,000/- For pain, shock and sufferings.Rs.700/- For conveyance charges from Jhalod to Godhra Civil Hospital.Rs.3,000/- For lodging, nursing and medicine charges in Godhra Hospital during 70 days.Rs.900/- For transport charges forfollow up treatment.Rs.10,000/- For artificial limb.Rs.1,34,400/- For loss of future economic loss.Rs.1,99,000/- plus costs and 12% interest.As far as the last figure of loss of future economic loss is concerned, the Tribunal in para. 21 of its judgment has assessed the future loss of income at Rs. 1000/- per month, and considering the disability at 70% and applying the multiplier of 16 the Tribunal has assessed the pecuniary loss at Rs. 1,34,400/-.2. On behalf of the appellants it is submitted that the claimant is aged seven years and his future...
Gangaben Wd/O. Chhaganbhai Havabhai and ors. Vs. the Regional Director ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-1995
Reported in: 1996ACJ330; (1995)2GLR1506
ORDER1. Whether the appellants have successfully proved that the death of the deceased was the result of employment injuries sustained by the deceased who was an insured person under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('Act' for short) and whether they are entitled to dependent's benefits under Section 77 of the Act is the theme of this appeal under Section 82 of the Act. The appellants are the original applicants who claimed dependent's benefits from the respondent - E. S. I. Corporation as dependents of the deceased workman Chhaganbhai Havabhai by invoking assistance of provisions of Section 77 of the Act. 2. According to the case of the original applicants, deceased Chhaganbhai was an insured person under the Act and he was employed by the New Swadeshi Mills. The deceased was working in the Frame Department of the company in the night shift on October 3, 1974 as a Drawing Tenter. He was working on Machine No. 5-A. The deceased while working on October 3, 1974...
Praful Harirai Munshi and anr. Vs. Kanakben Chandrakant Desai
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj142; (1995)2GLR914
ORDERY.B. Bhatt, J.1. The present petitioners were the original opponents, whereas the present respondent was the original applicant in PSRP No. 16-85 filed in the Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad under the provisions of Section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act, 1882 ('the Act' for short).2. The relevant and pertinent facts, in brief, are as under :2.1 The original applicant is a widow of Dr. C. H. Desai, who expired on 30th August 1989, and the original applicant, therefore, inherited all the properties as the sole heir including the tenancy rights of the property in question. The deceased husband of the original applicant had taken the premises on lease on a monthly rent of Rs. Rs. 200/- in the month of August 1951 from the then owner one Jasubhai Lallubhai Sheth. After taking the said property on lease, late Dr. C. H. Desai had entered into a partnership with the original opponent No. 1 effective from September, 1951. The said partnership continued with the business of runni...
Gangaben and ors. Vs. Regional Director, E.S.i. Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-16-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC542; I(1997)ACC292
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Whether the appellants have successfully proved that the death of the deceased was the result of employment injuries sustained by the deceased who was an insured person under the provisions of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('Act' for short) and whether they are entitled to dependent's benefits under Section 77 of the Act is the theme of this appeal under Section 82 of the Act.The appellants are the original applicants who claimed dependents' benefits from the respondent-E.S.I. Corporation as dependents of the deceased workman Chhaganbhai Havabhai by invoking assistance of provisions of Section 77 of the Act.2. According to the case of the original applicants, deceased Chhaganbhai was an insured person under the Act and he was employed by the New Swadeshi Mills. The deceased was working in the Frame Department of the company in the night shift on 3.10.1974 are Drawing Tenter. Hewasworkingon Machine No. 5-A. The deceased while working on 3.10.1974 in the night...
Ramanlal D. Desai and anr. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-15-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Guj33; (1996)2GLR381
ORDER1. The petitioners herein are the owners of certain lands which were notifiedunder Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act as land likely to be required for public purposes. This was followed through by a notification issued under Section 6 of the said Act. The latter notification was challenged by the petitioners-land owners by taking various proceedings, obtaining interim relief in such proceedings, etc. Apparently as the State felt that the delay in the completion of the acquisition proceedings would frustrate the vary purpose of acquisition the Government decided to drop the acquisition and ultimately implemented this decision by taking appropriate action whereby the petitioners' lands were released from acquisition.2. The petitioners thereupon felt that on account of the pendency of the acquisition proceedings, there was a restriction on their right to develop the land and, therefore, they had suffered substantial demages. Petitioners, therefore, made an application to the Coll...
Indian Bank Vs. Advance Art Silk Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jun-15-1995
Reported in: (1995)2GLR1089
N.J. Pandya, J.1. A common question arises in all the Revision Applications and it is pertaining to the computation of Court fees.2. Whenever a civil suit is filed, the plaintiff, is required to put valuation on the claim preferred in the suit. For this purpose, two statutes are to be borne in mind; one, of course, is Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 under which Court fees are levied at different rates as provided thereunder. However, for the purpose of valuation of the suit attention has to be paid to Suits Valuation Act, 1887 in central Enactment.3. Looking to the nature of the suit it is quite clear that Section 8 of the Suit Valuation Act, 1887 will be applicable. The suit it filed by the petitioner-Bank for recovery of its dues which according to the plaintiff-Bank were payable by the defendant-respondents by virtue of loan transactions.4. In other words, the plaintiff-Bank was seeking refund (return) of the amount borrowed by the defendants. Under Section 8 of the Valuation Act, there...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›