Gujarat Court March 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.
New Shorrock Mills Vs. Rameshbhai Atmaram Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR1675; (2000)IIILLJ1182Guj
ORDERJ.N. Bhatt, J.1. Rule, service of which is waived by learned advocate Mr. P.M. Vyas for the respondent.2. By this application, the applicant-original petitioner has sought review of the order recorded by this Court on October 17, 1997 in Civil Application No. 5037 of 1997 in Special Civil Application No. 1424 of 1996. Obviously, it was an interim order as it was passed and recorded pending the hearing of Special Civil Application on merits. The main matter, like that, Special Civil Application No. 1424 of 1996 is still pending and awaiting adjudication of this Court.3. The aforesaid Special Leave Civil Application came to be filed challenging the order dated October 21, 1994 recorded by the Labour Court and confirmed by the Industrial Court by its order dated December 4, 1995, directing reinstatement of the opponent herein with 40 per cent backwages. The opponent, of course, has also approached this Court by way of Special Civil Application No. 642/1996 questioning the deduction o...
Anjar Municipality and ors. Vs. J.M. Vyas and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj298; (1999)3GLR1892
C.K. Thakkar, Actg. C.J.1. In this petition, the petitioners have challenged constitutional validity of Section 263 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963, as amended by the Amendment Act of 1993 (Gujarat Act 17 of 1993). It is the say of the petitioners that the provisions of Section 263 are unconstitutional and ultra vires Part III as also Article 243U of the Constitution of India. A writ of mandamus is also sought for quashing and setting aside a notice dated January 27,1999 Annexure A to the petition. A prayer is made for a writ of prohibition restraining the respondent authorities from proceeding with the notice Annexure A to the petition.2. The case of the petitioner in that the petitioner No. 1 Anjar Municipality was constituted under the provisions of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and petitioner Nos. 2 to 16 were duly elected Councillors of petitioners No. 1 Municipality. All the Councillors are nationals and citizens of India and ...
State of Gujarat and anr. Vs. Mangubhai Kikabhai Halpati Through Heirs ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)3GLR2732
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This revision application by the State of Gujarat and Mamlatdar, Navsari under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code arises from the Order dated 14-7-1998 of the Civil Judge (S.D.), Navsari in Misc. Civil (Fari File) Application No. 41 of 1996 under which the application filed by the petitioners for the restoration of their Special Civil Suit No. 37 of 1991 which has been dismissed for non-prosecution, has been rejected.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the State of Gujarat and Mamlatdar, Navsari filed a Special Civil Suit No. 37 of 1991 against the defendants-respondents for the recovery of Rs. 83,948.87 ps. The summons of the suit were duly served on the defendants-respondents and they had also submitted their written statements. The suit was fixed for recording of the evidence of the plaintiffs-petitioners on 10-10-1995 in the trial Court.3. It is a case of the plaintiffs-petitioners that they remained present through their Advocate on each and every da...
Manjulaben Kalidas Chauhan and ors. Vs. Baroda Municipal Corporation
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR467
S.K. Keshote, J.1. The plaintiffs-petitioners have filed this revision application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment of 4th Extra Assistant Judge, Vadodara dated 17-9-1998 in the Misc. Civil Appeal No. 103 of 1996 filed by the defendant-respondent against the order of the Civil Judge (J.D.) Vadodara below Ex. 5 in the Regular Civil Suit No. 2029 of 1994 dated 29-1-1996 under which the temporary injunction as prayed for by them has been granted, which order is reversed.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the disputed shop has been purchased by the plaintiffs-petitioners on 15-11-1991 from Prabodhchandra Kanaiyalal Parikh. It is a case of the petitioners that the shop was constructed in the year 1988 by Shree Organisers and Association, which has been initially allotted to the predecessor-in-title of the plaintiffs-petitioners.3. It is a case of the defendant-respondent, the Baroda Municipal Corporation, Baroda that the disputed shop has b...
Harishbhai K. Patel Vs. Telecom District Manager
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj215
ORDERS.K. Keshote, J.1. The defendant-petitioner challenges the order dated 28-9-98 of Civil Judge, (S.D.), Navsari, in Special Civil Suit No. 66/97, under which his application for raising objection regarding jurisdiction of the Court to try the suit has been rejected.2. The defendant-petitioner gave the application and contended ihat the suit which has been filed by the plaintiff Telecom District Manager for recovery of outstanding telephone dues is not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The learned trial Court under the impugned order dismissed the application aforesaid. Hence this civil revision application.3. Same contention has been raised before this Court also by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find from the judgment of the learned trial Court that bill raised for outstanding telephone dues against the defendant-petitioner by the plaintiffs-respondents has not been disputed by the defendant-petitioner. Not only thi...
Kiritbhai Manilal Shah Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ2907; (2000)4GLR774
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. The petitioner, through this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the detention order dated 2.9.1998 passed by the District Magistrate, Vadodara, under Section 3(2) of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980, and has prayed for quashing of the said order and his immediate release from illegal detention.2. From the grounds of detention it appears that the petitioner was running two fair price shops, one in the name of Government approved fair price shop No.115, Shiyapura, Raopura, Vadodara city and other in the name of Tarsali Co.Operative Credit Society, shop No.189, Indrapuri Complex, Vadodara. Grave irregularities were found in the aforesaid fair price shops. Inquiry was held on 29.4.1998. The petitioner was asked to open his shop upto 5.00 p.m. There was allegation that he was not regularly opening his shop and was harassing the customers. The petitioner was asked to pro...
Natubhai Chandubhai Dhobi and ors. Vs. Kokilaben D/O. Chandubhai Motib ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR1666
M.S. Shah, J.1. In this Revision Application under Section 115 of the C.P.C. the petitioners-original defendants challenge the order dated 28-12-1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Anand, rejecting Application Exh. 37 in a suit which was previously numbered as Special Civil Suit No. 8 of 1989 and now re-numbered as Regular Civil Suit No. 453 of 1998.2. The respondents-original plaintiffs filed the present suit for recovering a sum of Rs. 33,000/- with interest and costs from the petitioners in the year 1989. The suit was instituted in the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) and it was also numbered as a Special Civil Suit. In the year 1993 the Bombay Civil Courts Act came to be amended and the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Court (Junior Division) was raised from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 50,000/-. The petitioners filed the present application on 17-9-1998 contending that the suit was required to be numbered as a Regular Civil Suit and transferred to the Court of the l...
Okhaji Girdharji Patel Vs. Collector Banaskantha
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-05-1999
Reported in: (1999)2GLR743
M.R. Calla, J.1. Both these petitions involve the dispute with regard to the gauchar land of village Bhensana, a part of which was resumed. The controversy between the parties in both the cases is based on identical facts and involve common questions and, therefore, I propose to decide both these matters by this common judgment and order.2. There is no dispute between the parties that on 31st May 1978, the Collector, Banaskantha, had passed an order resuming the land admeasuring 103 acres 11 gunthas of Survey Nos.54, 56 and 137 of village Bhensana Gram Panchayat, Bhensana under Section 96(4) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, on the basis of the census of cattle which was conducted in the year 1971. Aggrieved from this resumption of a part of the gauchar land, Bhensana Gram Panchayat filed Special Civil Application No.1355 of 1978 challenging the order of resumption. In this Special Civil Application, it was held out by way of a statement in the affidavit-in-reply on behalf of the responde...
Dilipbhai Rasiklal Shah and ors. Vs. A.M.C., Municipal Commissioner
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Guj284; (1999)3GLR2754
C.K. Thakkar, J. 1. This appeal is filed against dismissal of Special Civil Application No. 10834 of 1996 by the learned single Judge on August 5, 1997.2. The appellants were the original petitioners. They approached this Court by filing the above petition for an appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside orders at Annexures 'N', 'O' and 'P' and by directing the respondents to act in accordance with the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and in particular Rules 15,17,18 and 20 of the Rules in Chapter VIII. A prayer was also made that during the pendency and final disposal of the petition, the respondents may be directed to deliver the vehicles seized from the appellants.3. It was the case of the appellants that they filed Municipal Valuation Appeal No. 18444 of 1988 in the Small Cause Court, Ahmedabad against demand of tax at excessive rate. In spite of the fact that the appeal was pending, t...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hetalbhai C. Bagadia and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-04-1999
Reported in: 2000ACJ1356; AIR1999Guj213; (1999)3GLR2707
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The appellant Insurance Company seeks to challenge the judgment and award made by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Bhavnagar on 17-12-1996 in M.A.C. Petition No. 180 of 1994, 182 of 1994 and 183 of 1994, in which the claimants were awarded Rs. 4,48,000 (M.A.C. Petition No. 180 of 1994), Rs. 1,48,000 (M.A.C. Petition No. 182 of 1994) and Rs. 1,17,000 (M.A.C. Petition No. 183 of 1994) respectively with interest. Since all the three appeals raised common questions they have been argued together by the learned Counsel.2, The vehicular accident that resulted in the three claim petitions occurred on 12-11-1993 at about 10.00 p.m. near village Bhadi on Bhavnagar-Talaja Coastal Highway. The petitions were consolidated and the evidence was recorded in M.A.C. Petition No. 180 of 1994. According to the claimants, on the day of the incident, deceased Hetalbhai and two injured claimants -- Rajesh and Kalpesh were travelling in a jeep which while being driven rashly ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »