Gujarat Court May 1997 Judgments
Lilaram L. Revani Vs. R.D. Gandhi and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-13-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ14
ORDERS.D. Pandit, J.1. Lilaram A. Revani, a resident of Baroda has filed the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Respondent No. I Shri R. D. Gandhi, Chief Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Directorate, got an information on 14-4-1997 that the present petitioner and his brother Mangaram are dealing in foreign currency without holding any valid licence issued by Reserve Bank of India and they arc carrying out the said business in their two shops titled as M/s. Janu Emporium and M/s. Vijay Stores. On getting the said information, he carried out a raid on the shop of M/s. Janu Emporium which is owned by the present petitioner and at the time of the said raid, the petitioner's brother Mangaram was present there and at the time of the raid, they found foreign currency in U. S. $ 9355/- and Indian currency of Rs. 4.80 lacs. When the said search and raid was going on, it is the claim of the respondent No. I that, one person had come there to sell U. S. $ 230/...
Tag this Judgment!Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. the Master of M.V. giurgeni
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-12-1997
Reported in: (1997)2GLR1745
S.D. Dave, J.1. Proceedings on hand call upon me to answer two Questions. They are:(1) Whether the High Court of Gujarat, in exercise of its Admiralty Jurisdiction, has the POWER and/or JURISDICTION to order the arrest of a Sister Ship?(2) Whether M.V. Giurgeni a Foreign Flag Vessel presently in the Port and Harbour of Kandla (Gujarat) can be said to be the Sister Ship of M.V. Kalo, which admittedly is not in Coastal Waters of the State of Gujarat or the Territorial Waters of India?2. These Questions arise because of the filing of the Admiralty Suit, by the plaintiffs. The Shipping Corporation of India Limited, valued at Rs. 2,32,75,640-00 and the presentation of a Civil Application for the arrest of M.V. Giurgeni, the Orders of Arrest duly executed and the Notice of Motion taken out by the other side praying for the vacation of the said Orders for Want of Jurisdiction.3. The suit by the plaintiffs is an action in Rem for, or a suit in Damages. The damages are being claimed on the basi...
Tag this Judgment!Shakriben Somaji Thakore and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR1908
R.R. Jain, J.1. Communication Annexure 'C dated 2-8-1996 sent by Competent Authority to the petitioners refusing to grant permission for sale under Section 26 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is challenged by invoking writ jurisdiction.2. A few relevant facts giving rise to this petition are stated as under :The petitioners were the tenants of land bearing Survey No. 75/2 corresponding to F.P. No. 177 of the Town Planning Scheme No. 90. Subsequently, by friction of law the petitioners were declared as deemed purchasers and thus became owner of the land. All the petitioners agreed to sell their respective sub-plots to the petitioner No. 25, a Co-operative Housing Society. The petitioners entered into separate sale deeds and the same were presented on 1-6-1996 for registration in the office of Sub-Registrar, Ahmedabad (Memnagar). Thereafter on 6-6-1996 the petitioners served notice under Section 26(1) of the Act informing respon...
Tag this Judgment!Vinodchandra B. Pandit Vs. Bank of India and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR824
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner, an officer of the Bank of India, challenges by this Special Civil Application, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the order of the disciplinary authority, annexure `F', dated 28th June 1983, under which penalty of removal from the services was given and further orders annexures `H' & `J' of the Appellate Authorities, dated 24th October 1983 and 7th June 1984, respectively, under which the order annexure `F' was confirmed.2. The petitioner was removed from the services after holding full fledged departmental inquiry. The petitioner was given detailed chargesheet vide memo dated 10th August 1982, to which the petitioner has submitted his reply. After completion of inquiry, the inquiry officer submitted a report to the disciplinary authority, who after considering the same and other record, under the order dated 28th June 1983, ordered for removal of the petitioner from services. It is not in dispute that alongwith the order of respond...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Sidhee Cement Ltd. Vs. Caldyn Apparetabau Gmbh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR2357
S.D. Dave, J.1. The present Appeal From Order arises out of the orders passed by the learned Chamber Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad on the Notice of Motion in Civil Suit No. 1133 of 1997 dated March 11, 1997 and March 14, 1997.2. The appellant before me happens to be the original defendant No. 1. The respondent No. 1 happens to be the original plaintiff. The rest of the respondents happen to be the original defendant Nos. 2 & 3. The parties shall be referred to as per their nomenclature before the Court below. Plaintiff, which can for the sake of brevity could be referred as 'Caldyn' has filed Civil Suit No. 1133 of 1997 against the three defendants, namely, Gujarat Sidhee Cement Limited, State Bank of India Commercial Branch, Ahmedabad and SGZ-Bank Germany. According to the plaintiff, they are a Company registered under the German laws at Germany and happen to be the manufacturers and suppliers of Caldyn Systems, which are used for quenching of hot gases in a variety of industries...
Tag this Judgment!Nagjibhai Bhimjibhai and anr. Vs. President, Gariadhar Nagar Panchayat ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR1921
S.K. Keshote, J.1. All these Special Civil Applications have arisen from the same facts and grounds of challenge to the action of the respondents and I consider it to be appropriate to decide all these Special Civil Applications by this common order.2. Except in Special Civil Application No. 2134 of 1988, in all other Special Civil Applications, the reply has been filed.Special Civil Application No. 2134 of 1988 :3. There are two petitioners in this Special Civil Application. The petitioner No. 1 was appointed as a Driver on 5-4-1956 in Gariadhar District Municipality, then under the State of Saurashtra. The petitioner No. 2 was appointed as a Sweeper on 1-11-1950 in the same Municipality. The appointments of both the petitioners were made under the provisions of the Bombay District Municipal Act, 1901. Thereafter, on 1 -4-1963, the Gariadhar District Municipality became Gariadhar Gram Panchayat under the provisions of Section 307 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961. Both the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedabad District Grant-in-aid Primary School Employees Association a ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-09-1997
Reported in: (1997)2GLR1728
S.K. Keshote, J.1. As all these petitions proceed on the common facts and legal grounds, same were taken for hearing together with consent of the parties and are being disposed off by this common order. In these petitions, there are two classes of petitioners. One is the Union of Prathmik Shikshaks and the other is individual Prathmik Shikshaks (Primary Teachers). These petitions have arisen from different districts of the State of Gujarat. The dispute relates to discontinuation of monthly payment of medical allowance to the primary school teachers who are serving in private recognised grant-in-aid primary schools in different districts of this State. One fact to be noticed in the petitions arising from the Gandhinagar District, is that the primary teachers serving in the private recognised grant-in-aid primary schools were not getting the medical allowance at all.2. Special Civil Application No. 465 of 1991 has been filed by the Ahmedabad District Grant-in-aid Primary School Employees...
Tag this Judgment!Kanaiyalal Arjandas Vs. Tribhovandas Devsibhai Pandit and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-08-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3482
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Kanaiyalal Arjandas-original complainant in Criminal case No. 82)9 of 1984 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narol has preferred the present Revision Application against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Narol passed on 17th September, 1985 in Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1985. Neither Revision Applicant nor the applicant's advocate is present, but as this Revision Application is admitted and as the record and proceedings is on record, I proceed to decide this Revision Application on merits after perusing the record and after hearing the learned -Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Divetia supporting the Revision Applicant.2. The respondent No. 1 was charge-sheeted by the police of Narol police station on the allegation that on 49-1 1-84, at about 12.45 p.m., he drove his truck No. GTC 2265 at Kubernagar, 'G' ward near Radhaswami Auto Centre in rash and negligent manner and caused death of Kishorbhai, aboy aged about...
Tag this Judgment!Reliance and Other Mills Workmen Union Vs. Asst. Registrar of Trade Un ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR1964
1. This Special Civil Application involves a dispute between the Unions of Silk Textile Industries for Ahmedabad City local area under the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The Unions seek registration under the aforesaid Act. There is not much controversy, rather no controversy with regard to the basic facts. The only question is as to whether the petitioner-Union can legitimately claim to get its application decided under Section 13(3) for registration as a Primary Union with regard to the local area, as aforesaid while the applications moved for registration as Representative Union under Section 13(1) by the petitioner-Union, Mill Mazdoor Sabha, Rajpur and Ahmedabad Silk Employees' Union, on dates earlier to the petitioners' application under Section 13(3) are pending before the Assistant Registrar for Trade Unions under the B.I.R. Act. 2. Before I proceed to deal with the question directly, it may be stated that the Mill Mazdoor Sabha, Rajpur was the Union registered as a Repr...
Tag this Judgment!Subhsagar Enterprises Vs. J.K. Synthetics Co. Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: May-07-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR1838
J.M. Panchal, J.1. This is a revisional application under Section 115 Civil Procedure Code by the defendants against the order passed by the learned Judge of City Civil Court setting aside an ex parte decree passed against them on their depositing in Court a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- within the time prescribed by the order. The petitioners who are original defendants have been sued by the respondent for price of goods supplied to the petitioners. The suit was filed as a Summary Suit under Order 37 C.P.C. read with Rule 142 of Ahmedabad City Civil Courts Rules, 1961 to recover a sum of Rs. 50,20,770-86 with interest and cost. On service of the summons of the suit, the petitioners entered an appearance through learned pleader Shri B. A Surit. The respondent thereafter, served on the petitioners a summons for judgment in prescribed form on April 11, 1991. Thereupon the matter was posted for hearing on May 2, 1991. It is the case of the petitioners that they had determined the appointment of l...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »