Gujarat Court August 1997 Judgments
Varun Seacon Ltd. Vs. Bharat Bijlee Ltd.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj99; (1997)3GLR2553
M.S. Shah, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated March 11, 1996, passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Nadiad, below application Ex. 5 in Civil Misc. Application No. 113 of 1995, which was filed by the respondent herein under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for staying the proceedings of Special Civil Suit No. 114 of 1995 filed by the appellant herein for recovering an amount of Rs. 5 lacs. 2. The respondent-defendant herein had supplied certain equipments including transformers to the appellant-plaintiff in the year 1995. There were disputes between the parties. The respondent supplier claimed Rs. 19 lacs (Approx.) being the balance amount of consideration whereas the case of appellant plaintiff was that because of the defects in the machines, the appellant had suffered damage of Rs. 24 lacs. The appellant therefore, prayed for a decree of Rs. 5 lacs from the respondent herein by filing Special Civil Suit No. 114 of 1995 in the Court of the learned Civil Jud...
Tag this Judgment!Miteshchandra Manilal and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3077; (1997)3GLR677
ORDERN.J. Pandya, J.1. In all these petitions, the question involved is revolving around the events that took place in Dakor Court, District Kheda. It was reported in newspaper and later on substantiated that in the said Court, warrants are being issued against any one and every one, just for asking and all that has to be done is to file a complaint of whatsoever nature.2. The events involving the Presiding Officer of Dakor Court is referred to in the aforesaid brief manner because, as a fall out of what happened in Dakor Court, there came to be filed a complaint against persons involved in some of the complaint in different police stations alleging offences under Sections 120-B, 181, 182, 205, 211, 465, 468, 469 all of Indian Penal Code. In first of the aforesaid matters namely Cr.M.A No. 5722 of 1994, a complaint came to be registered for the aforesaid offences at Dakor Police Station, as Crime Register No. I 211/94. The offence was registered under the instructions of the Senior Pol...
Tag this Judgment!Halimabibi W/O Abdul Rahim Vs. Abdul Raheman Abdul Rahim
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-14-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR2633
R. Balia, J.1. This second appeal is filed against the judgment and decree passed by Extra Assistant Judge, Surat in Regular Civil Appeal No. 194 of 1977 of 22-1-1979 affirming the judgment and decree dated 31-3-1977 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 368 of 1971 by Joint Civil Judge (J.D.), Surat by which the preliminary decree was passed in suit filed by the one Abdul Rehman for administration of the property left by Abdul Rahim Abdul Razak. The following three substantial questions were framed by this Court while admitting appeal which were required to be considered in this appeal:(1) Whether the plaintiff's suit was barred under Section 1 read with Section 50 of the Administration of Evacuees Property Act.(2) Whether the suit was barred by res-judicata on account of decision between the parties in earlier suit No. 326 of 1969.(3) Whether the gift was made under the Mohammedan Law and was void or whether it was executed under the Transfer of Property Act and was valid.2. Learned Couns...
Tag this Judgment!Hem Plast Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Baroda Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-13-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Guj23; (1998)1GLR464
ORDERR.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner challenges the award of rate contract by the respondent No. 2 to the respondents Nos. 3 to 6 on the footing that he has been arbitrarily denied to participate by offering F(II) quality bandage cloth and absorbent gauge. 2. The case of the petitioner is that F(II) quality of absorbent gauze and bandage cloth has been prescribed under Rule 124-C of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 in Schedule F(II) thereof and these goods offered by the petitioner were of the standards so prescribed and therefore, the petitioner could not have been prevented from participating as a tenderer on the ground that the petitioner's goods do not have ISI mark certification more particularly since the tender notice never prescribed the requirement that the goods should be of ISI mark. The case of the petitioner is that the standards prescribed for the surgical dressings under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules and the Indian Standard prescribed under Bureau of Indian Stan...
Tag this Judgment!Premilaben Ishwarlal Raijada Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-12-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ1339; (1998)1GLR248
S.D. Shah, J.1. This C.R.A. is directed against the judgment and order of M.A.C.T. (Main) at Rajkot dated 21.9.1993 arising from the execution proceedings for executing the above (sic.) order. It appears that the M.A.C.P. No. 109 of 1990 was instituted by one D.P. Dholakia before the Tribunal at Rajkot. In the accident two vehicles were involved, one being the Fiat car which was not insured as required under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and another vehicle being autorickshaw which was insured with the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. The claim of the claimant was partially passed by the Tribunal, inter alia, holding that he was entitled to recover amount of Rs. 43,000/- with 12 per cent interest from the date of the application till realisation and proportionate costs of the petition from the present petitioner who was the original opponent travelling in the Fiat car and from opponent Nos. 3 & 4 jointly and severally. Though it is stated in the memo of C.R.A. that the judgment a...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Gujarat Vs. Ganpatbhai Premjibhai Joshi
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2160
N.J. Pandya, J.1. The grievance made in the appeal is that to an offender of control orders under the Essential Commodities Act, the benefit of probation has been extended. The Ld. Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur by the order dated 21-3-1997 in, Spl. Case No. 4/86, gave the said benefit when after 4 prosecution witnesses were examined, by the pursis at Exh. 38, respondent accused disclosed before the trial Court that he has already closed the shop and as the case has been pending since long, benefit be given to him of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.2. On behalf of the respondent accused, it was pointed out that if at all there be any lapse on the part of the Ld. Trial Judge, it is only to the effect that report of the Probation Officer has not been called for otherwise all special circumstances which would earn him benefit of the said provisions of probation are there on record.3. The matter has been pending from the date of the inspection of the busines...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshchandra Manilal Kotia and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-1997
Reported in: (1998)2GLR1222
N.J. Pandya, J.1. Petition Nos. 106 of 1997, 661, 663 and 110 of 1997 are for offences under the Companies Act and Petition Nos. 662, 108, 107, 109, 664, 665, 666, 3085 and 3086 all of 1997 are for offences under the Indian Penal Code. These two groups of matters, though apparently filed for offences under different Acts, are very much interconnected not only because of the parties joined, but also because of the factual background which they share in different complaints allegedly constituting the offence under either the Companies Act or under the Indian Penal Code.2. As many as 19 accused came to be joined in different complaints in respect of which, in all, aforesaid 13 petitions have been filed. Accused No. 1 and accused No. 7 in all the complaints are respectively a Private Limited Company and a Public Limited Company. Accused Nos. 2 to 6 are connected with accused No. 1 Company either as a Director or as a Managing Director, as the case may be. Same is the situation with regard ...
Tag this Judgment!Gujarat Tobacco Merchants Association Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-08-1997
Reported in: (1998)1GLR574
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner challenges the Notification dated 4-3-1997 at Annexure 'C' to the petition by which the Government declared that the ten market areas shall cease to be such areas and added the agricultural produce of tobacco in the market areas of the 30 Market Committees named therein.2. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that draft Notification showing the intention of the Director was published on 2-3-1994 as per Annexure-A to the petition in the Official Gazette and also in a Gujarati Daily but it was not published as required by Rule 3 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965 which requires that a Notification issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 5 or Sub-section (1) of Section 6 shall also be published by affixing a copy in Gujarati thereof at a conspicuous place in the office of each of the local authorities functioning in the area specified in the Notification. It was submitted that this Notification was finally published on 4-3-...
Tag this Judgment!G.S.R.T.C. Vs. Hiraben C. Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-07-1997
Reported in: 2(1997)ACC621
J.N. Bhatt, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award of MACT (Auxiliary) Vadodara dated 13.11.1995 upon application of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 original claimants, exercising its power under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act'), by way of interim award to the tune of Rs. 25,000 -- against the appellant-original opponent No. 2 Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation ('GSRTC').2. GSRTC has contended that the tribunal has erred in interpreting the expression 'arising out of use of the motor vehicle' employed in Section 140, in that, it was submitted that the death of deceased Harish cannot be said to have arisen out of the use of the motor vehicle, like that, bus and, therefore, the tribunal should not have exercised powers under Section 140 of the Act. This submission is countenanced by the learned advocate for the original claimants.3. Since, in view of the prima facie facts and circumstances, the Tribunal has passed the interim award of compensati...
Tag this Judgment!Paman Bhobhrajmal Navlani Vs. Deputy Municipal Commissioner and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Aug-07-1997
Reported in: (1997)3GLR2431
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. This group of petitions raises common points and has been heard together at the instance of both the sides and is being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. The petitioners have challenged notices given to them by the respondent Vadodara Municipal Corporation by which they are required to remove the encroachments made by them within 15 days of the receipt of the notice, failing which the Corporation informed them that it would remove the encroachments at their expense. These notices narrate the fact that the temporary licence of the petitioners in respect of the placement of cabin/larry/hand-cart had expired, which dates fall in most cases in December, 1988 and March, 1989 and that they were liable to be removed in view of the Scheme framed pursuant to the directions of Hon'ble the Supreme Court. The notices were given in April, 1997.3. According to the petitioners, they were given small plots admeasuring about 5' x 5' in the Laheripura area of Ward N...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »