Gujarat Court July 1997 Judgments
Vallabhbhai Karsanbhai Patel and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-30-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1616
S.D. Shah, J.1. The present Civil Revision Application is filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the original plaintiffs mainly against the State of Gujarat, respondent No. 5, obviously because the dispute is about the payment of Court fee on the relief prayed. The other parties, namely, the rest of the defendants are not necessary in deciding the question in issue, hence they are rightly deleted vide order dated 15th of February, 1994.2. The petitioners-plaintiffs have instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 170 of 1988 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Gondal and in the said suit there were four defendants. At the time of the institution of the suit, the plaintiffs have, for the purpose of Court fee and jurisdiction, valued the suit at Rs. 300/- and have paid the Court fee of Rs. 30/-. If one refers to the relief clause in Para 9 of the plaint, plaintiffs have by Para 9(1), inter alia, prayed that the defendants have by registered document, registered at No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Dy. General Manager, O.N.G.C. Vs. Chaturji Lalaji and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-29-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR130
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. Admit. In this group of eight appeals, the service is waived by learned Advocate Mr. A.. Patel for the respondents-original claimants, by learned A.G.P. Mr. Mukesh Patel for Spl. Land Acq. Officer in F.A. Nos. 5137 of 1996 to 5141 of 1996 and by learned G.P. Mr. P.G. Desai, for Spl. Land Acq. Officer in F.A, Nos. 5134 of 1996 to 5136 of 1996. Upon joint request, the entire group of eight appeals is taken up today for final hearing. In view of the fact that the common questions are involved arising out of common award and common notification, they are being disposed of by this common judgment simultaneously.2. The appellant O.N.G.C. is the original opponent No. 2, has questioned the legality and validity of the two common judgments and eight awards arising out of land Acq. I case Nos. 772 to 779 of 1991. The aforesaid eight Land Acq. Cases were heard upon a reference, by the District Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) and recorded two judgments which are under challenge in this g...
Tag this Judgment!United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Maganlal Hirabhai Patel and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-28-1997
Reported in: 1999ACJ268
S.D. Shah, J.1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. has preferred this C.R.A. under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code challenging the order passed below Exh. 12 by the M.A.C.T. (Main) at Junagadh in Civil Misc. Application No. 452 of 1992 wherein in the vehicular accident that took place the claimant received injuries and applied for payment of amount due and payable under the principle of 'no fault liability', i.e., Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The accident in question has taken place on 16.12.1989 and admittedly the accident was vehicular accident which has taken place around 3.00 p.m. at a distance of 2 km. from Keshod Police Station which is near the ST bus stand of village Chansari of Distt. Junagadh. The vehicle involved in the accident is a motor cycle bearing registration No. GCA 627 and at the relevant time opponent No. 1 was driving the motor cycle rashly and negligently and opponent No. 2 is the owner of the motor cycle and opponent No. 3 is the insurance compa...
Tag this Judgment!Savitaben Madhukar Makiwana and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-25-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj72; (1998)1GLR321
ORDERR.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioners who are the elected Councillors of the respondent No. 3 Municipality have challenged the order dated 12th February, 1997 -- Annexure 'H' to the petition, passed by the State Government under the provisions of Section 263(1) of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963, dissolving the respondent No. 3-Kalol Municipality and appointing the Deputy Collector of Mehsana to be the Administrator.2. In the election of the Municipality which was held in 1994, the petitioners who are 23 Councillors and other Councillors were declared elected. In January. 1995, President, Vice-president and Chairman of the Standing Committee of the Municipality were also elected. There were in all 36 Municipal Councillors in the respondent-Municipality, of whom one passed away. According to the petitioners, six defaulting Councillors had passed certain resolutions behind their back, which were not acceptable to the petitioners.3. The acts of mismanagement had attracted the a...
Tag this Judgment!Ashokkumar B. Chandalia Vs. Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-24-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR369
S.K. Keshote, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels for the parties.The petitioner, Transport Manager of the respondent-Corporation challenges the order dated 12th April, 1993 under which he was placed under suspension from service in purported exercise of powers under Section 56 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental enquiry against him for serious charges of fabrication of 292 vouchers for Rs. 2,74,630/-, which has resulted in heavy financial loss to the Corporation. It is also not in dispute that in connection with the aforesaid serious misconduct charge-sheets were given to the petitioner on 20th April, 1993 and criminal case has also been lodged for the offence of misappropriation of Rs. 2,74,630/- by fabricating false receipts.2. However, Counsel for the respondent admits that the inquiry has not been finally concluded. The contention of the Counsel for the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Transport and Dock Workers Union Vs. Kandla Dock Labour Board and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-23-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR481
S.K. Keshote, J. 1. The petitioner, Transport & Dock Workers Union, through its Vice-president, Kandla Port, Kachchh, filed this Special Civil Application before this Court and following prayers have been made : (a) quash and set aside the tender notice dated 18-6-1993 Annexure 'A' reinviting the contract thereby terminating the service of the above workmen who are working with the respondent No. 1 for the last 8 years : (b) direct the respondents to continue the workmen at Annexure 'C' with all benefits as available to regular workmen of respondent No. 1; (c) direct the respondent No. 1, forthwith to treat the above workers as per Annexure 'C', as the workers of respondent No. 1 and to extend them all service benefits including payment of weekly off, etc. with retrospective effect; (d) pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this Special Civil Application this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to restrain the respondents, their agents, servants or subordinates from in any manner t...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlesh Manilal Mehta and ors. Vs. Amreli Municipality and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-23-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj77
R.A. Mehta, Actg. C.J.1. The ten petitioners have filed this petition in the name of public interest litigation challenging the construction of 'a shopping center in the playground of Government Girls' School' in the town of Amreli.On behalf of the respondents, an unaffirmed affidavit-in-reply is filed with an undertaking that it will be affirmed by tomorrow and copies thereof have been given to the learned advocatefor the petitioners.The affidavit-in-reply alleges that the present litigation is gross abuse of the process of the Court and of public interest litigation. It is submitted that one Ashokkumar Kava had filed Civil Suit No. 268 of 1995 claiming that he was a tenant of part of the open land and the municipality should be restrained from putting up any construction of the shopping centre at that place and from interfering with the possession of that plaintiff. The ex parte interim relief was granted and after hearing the defendant-municipality, it was vacated. Same thing happen...
Tag this Judgment!Trustees of Hareshwar Mahadev Trust Vs. Trustees of Shri Jasvantsinhji ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-23-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR434
R. Balia, J.1. This second appeal is filed by trustees of Hareshwar Mahadev Trust, a public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act against whom suit filed by the respondent-trustees on behalf of another Public Trust known as Shri Jaswantsinhji Audichya Brahman Boarding Vidyarthi Bhavan and registered under Bombay Public Trusts Act has been decreed by both the Courts below.2. Plaintiffs have filed present suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) for declaration of their title to land comprised in Survey No. 60 at C.T No. 63 and removal of encroachment made on the land by constructing a lavatory and cesspool and also for permanent prohibitory injunction. The assertion of the plaintiffs in the plaint was that the property in question was a grant from the State by Lekh No. 101, which is Exh. 116, and the property in question was entered in the register of public trust as property of the plaintiff-trust after holding an enquiry under Section 19 of the Bombay Public Tr...
Tag this Judgment!Addition Advertising Vs. Union of India
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-22-1997
Reported in: 1998(98)ELT14(Guj); (1998)1GLR317; 2006[2]STR228; [2007]6STT254
R.A. Mehta, A.C.J.1. The petitioner, an advertising agency challenges the vires of the provisions of Sections 65(16)(d) and 66(2) of the Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994 as amended. By these provisions, a service tax is imposed on advertising service. The challenge is based upon Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 265 of the Constitution of India. 2. section 65(16)(d) defines 'taxable service' to mean .... any service provided to a client by an advertising agency in relation to advertisements in any manner. Section 66 is the charging section which provides that there shall be charged a service tax at the rate of 5% of the value of the taxable service. Section 67 provides for valuation of taxable service for charging the service tax and clause (d) provides that in relation to service provided by an advertising agency to a client, the gross amount charged by such agency from the client shall be for services in relation to the advertising. 3. It is submitted that advertising service is a skill of exp...
Tag this Judgment!Vinodchandra Balkrishna Pandit Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-22-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR843
S.D. Pandit, J.1. Vinodchandra B. Pandit the original petitioner in S.C.A. No. 3866 of 1984 has preferred this Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge on 9.5.1997 by which his petition has been dismissed. 2. The appellant-petitioner joined the respondent-Bank of India as a clerk on 18.3.1963. He was promoted to the cadre of officer and on 1.12.1972, he was working as a Manager at Pilvai Branch of Bank of India from 1.7.1974 to 6.3.1980. It is the claim of the respondent-bank that while he was working as Manager at Pilvai Branch, the petitioner had not worked with utmost integrity and honesty and that while he was working there he sanctioned 13 loans in favour of different persons. But for sanctioning of the said loans he had taken illegal gratification from the borrowers varying from Rs. 100/- to Rs. 3000/-. Against these 13 sanctioned loans, there was a loan of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of one Chhaganbhai Bababhai Chaudhary and while sancti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »