Gujarat Court February 1999 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.
Sarsavadiya Savitaben Narsinhbhai Vs. Harilal Kaniji Patel and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj308
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J. 1. As these two civil revision applications have arisen from the counter suits filed by the parties against each other, the learned trial Court decided the applications Ex. 5 in both the suits by common order and the appeals filed by the parties against the order of the learned trial Court below Ex. 5 have also been decided by the first appellate Court under a common order, I consider it to be appropriate to take up these civil revision applications together and decide these by a common order. 2. As per the case of Harilal Kanji Patel, on 20th June 1997, an agreement to sell of the suit land has been executed by Jivrajbhai Parsottambhai in his favour. The sale consideration was agreed to be Rs. 45,000/-. On 2nd May 1998, as per the case of Savitaben Narshibhai, a sale deed of the suit land has been executed by Jivrajbhai Parshottambhai Patel in her favour and the sale consideration thereof was of Rs. 50,000/-. These two transactions gave rise to two counter suits,...
Suo Motu Vs. Secretary, Home Dept., Govt. of Gujarat and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj326; (1999)1GLR677
S.D. Dave, J. 1. These orders shall govern the disposal of the two petitions and the Civil Application captioned as above. 2. Both the petitions have been treated as Public Interest Litigations and have been heard and are being decided in the arena of Public Interest Litigation. 3. Special Civil Application No. 8061 of 1992 came to be filed by the petitioner Lok Adhikar Sangh. The petitioner has taken the leave for filing the petition as the Public Interest Litigation, raising the questions of the safety of the, passengers and the public against the increasing number of road accidents, and complaining against 'the total failure of the Government to control and reduce the number of these accidents.' 4. The petitioner Lok Adhikar Sangh have prayed for the following prayers at para-8 of the petition. (A) appointing a high level commission to enquire into the causes of motor accidents and to submit a report to the Hon' ble High Court with its recommendations and suggestions; (B) directing...
Bina Harilal Luhar Vs. Soni Dhankuvarben Jayram
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-22-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR555
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. The petitioner-original obstructor challenges by this civil revision application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the order dated 24.2.98 of the Civil Judge, (S.D.), Jamnagar, below ex. 17 in Execution Petition No. 24/85 and also the order dated 2.5.98 passed by Extra Assistant Judge, Jamnagar, dismissing the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 18 of 1998. Under the first order, the learned Executing Court rejected the objection of the obstructor against the execution of decree and under the second order, the appellate Court confirmed that order in appeal.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the obstructor-petitioner-Bina Harilal Luhar is daughter of late Harilal D Luhar. Shri Harilal Luhar admittedly expired in the year 1981. The respondent No. 2-Shantaben Harilal Luhar, is widow of late Harilal Luhar. The decree-holder Soni Dhankuvarben Jayram filed a suit for possession of disputed property against the judgment-debtor defendant-respondent No. ...
Legal Rep. and Heirs of Karsandas Gordhandas Parmar Vs. Bahadursingh M ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR496
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. These two cases are proposed to be disposed of by a common Judgment.2. In the Civil Application the prayer is that in view of subsequent events occurring during pendency of the eviction suit the decree for eviction passed by the trial Court and confirmed by the lower Appellate Court be set aside.3. Civil Revision Application has been filed by the revisionists who are the legal representatives of the deceased tenant under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947 (for short 'the Rent Act').4. Brief facts giving rise to this revision are as under :The suit premises was let out on a monthly rent of Rs.200/- per month besides Rs.80/- p.m. towards municipal taxes. It was let out for a short period of six months and after expiry of the said period the defendant was required to vacate the premises. It was not vacated, hence the allegation was that the tenant committed breach of the terms of tenancy. There was another ground for eviction that the defendant tenant was in ...
Pinjara Habib Mohmed Vs. Pathan Nishar Ahmedkhan Talibkhan
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-19-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR435
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. This is tenant's revision under Section 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act.2. The facts giving rise to this revision are as under :A Suit for eviction of the revisionist was filed by the respondent No. 1 on the ground that the disputed accommodation was let out to the revisionist on a monthly rent of Rs. 65/- per month and Rs. 4/- per month were charged as house tax, etc. The rent fell due from 1.3.1984. Accordingly notice was given on 27.4.1985 under Certificate of posting. Evasive reply of this notice was given by the revisionist. The notice was not complied with hence Suit for eviction, recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits was filed.3. The Suit was resisted on the ground that there was no agreement for payment of rent at the rate of Rs. 65/- p.m. nor was there agreement for payment of Rs. 4/- p.m. towards taxes. On the other hand the agreed rate of rent according to the defendant revisionist was Rs. 25/- p.m. He also applied for fixation of standard rent. Di...
State of Gujarat Vs. Hiteshkumar Alias Hiten Gorshanbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-18-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4346; (2000)1GLR345
A.M. Kapadia, J.1. By means of filing this appeal, State of Gujarat has called in question the judgment and order dated 29.6.1991 recorded in Sessions Case No. 101 of 1987 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, of Kheda at Nadiad, whereby he acquitted respondent/original accused of the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) on the accusation that in the evening of 24.11.1985, the accused committed murder of his wife Meena by strangulating her and thereafter to screen the offence thrown her dead-body in the canal of Kaloli village.2. The basic facts which are required to be narrated for disposal of this appeal are that:2.1. P.W.1, Manubhai Ambalal, Police Patel of Kaloli village was informed on 25.11.1985 at about 10 A.M., by one Chhagabhai Bhathibhai that dead body of a woman was found floating in the canal. Therefore, he in the company of Chhagabhai and Sarpanch Umedbhai went there and found that dead body of a woman was floating in the...
Anantrai L. Vadnagra Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-18-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR251
M.R. Calla, J.1. This Special Civil Application is directed against the order dated 2.5.94 passed against the petitioner by the Health and Family Welfare Department by the order of Governor under the signatures of the Deputy Secretary whereby the penalty of compulsory retirement has been imposed against the petitioner on the basis of an inquiry held against him. This order dt.2.5.94 also finds mention in the office order (communication) dt. 9.5.94, a copy of which was sent to the petitioner by the Chief Insurance Medical Officer, Class-I, Employees State Insurance Scheme, D1, Rajkot. The petitioner, holding the qualification of Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery, was initially appointed as Insurance Medical Officer on 17.10.66. He was promoted as Insurance Medical Officer, Class II in May 1976. A charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner alongwith the Memo dated 28.4.87 and the petitioner was subjected to an inquiry on the basis of the charge-sheet. The charge-sheet contain 1...
Dabhoi Nagarpalika Vs. Omkarbhai Somabhai Patel and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1999
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ461Guj
R. Balia, J.1. This group of petitions are by Dabhoi Nagarpalika, challenging the common award by the Labour Court dated September 29, 1996, by which seven of its workmen retrenched on February 15,1991, have been ordered to be reinstated with 75 per cent back wages on finding the retrenchment illegal and invalid. These 7 petitions are against 7 different workmen. The facts are not in dispute for the present case. All the 7 workmen-respondents were appointed on temporary basis as daily rated workmen. Their services were terminated by order dated February 15, 1991. During this period they were continuously in service. The order dated February 15, 1991 was to bring retrenchment into effect from that date. The order also recorded that along with the order in lieu of the notice period of one month the workmen are being paid wages for the notice period amounting to Rs. 711/- and that they were also simultaneously being paid Rs. 2488.50 as retrenchment compensation. A handwritten note also ap...
Naranbhai D. Chamar Vs. Dist. Development Officer
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR135
M. R. Calla, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed by the Taluka Development Officer, Chanasma on 21.8.71 against the vacant post of Watchman in the office of the Taluka Panchayat. The appointment order dated 21.8.71 enclosed with the Special Civil Application as Annexure 'A' shows that for the purpose of giving appointment against the vacant post of Watchman, the names were called from the Employment Exchange, Mehsana and the candidates, whose names were sponsored by the Employment Exchange, were called for interview on 29.7.70. The petitioner was selected in the aforesaid interviews and was given appointment as Watchman on a fixed pay of Rs.80/- per month. This order also shows that this appointment was given on ad hoc basis. Thereafter, the Development Commissioner for the State of Gujarat passed an order Annexure 'B'. The revised pay scale of Rs.196-232 was sanctioned for the aforesaid post of Watchman, against which the petitioner was working, and sanctioned pay scale was to...
Dabhoi Nagarpalika Vs. Omkarbhai Somabhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Feb-17-1999
Reported in: (2000)GLR216
R. Balia, J.1. This group of petitions are by Dabhoi Nagar Palika, challenging the common award by the Labour court dated 29.9.1995, by which seven of its workmen retrenched on 15.2.1991, have been ordered to be reinstated with 75 per cent back wages on finding the retrenchment illegal and invalid. These 7 petitions are against 7 different workmen. The facts are not in dispute for the present case. All the 7 workmen, respondents were appointed on temporary basis as daily rated workmen on 1.5.1984. Their services were terminated by order dated 15.2.1991. During this period they were continuously in service. The order dated 15.2.1991 was to bring retrenchment into effect from that date. The order also recorded that along with the order in lieu of the notice period of one month the workmen are being paid wages for the notice period amounting to Rs.711/- and that they were also simultaneously being paid Rs.2488.50 as retrenchment compensation. A hand written note also appears on the bottom...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »