Gujarat Court July 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.
Shabaan RotkIn Vs. Shahida Rotkin
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-13-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR111
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. The petitioner has sought a direction on the Officer in charge of Navsari Police Station to trace out the respondents nos.1 and 2 along with his two children, namely, daughter Nabeelah and son Yaseen claiming custody of these children. According to the petitioner he and the respondent no.1, Shahida married on 11th July 1990 as per the Islamic rites. At that time the respondent no.1 was an Indian citizen. Thereafter, due to marriage she became a citizen of Botswana following the petitioner's citizenship. According to the petitioner a daughter and a son were born during the marriage and they are 8 and 4 years of age respectively. Some differences arose between the parties, as a result of which according to the petitioner the respondent no.1 left his house along with their two children. The petitioner learnt that they had crossed the border of that country. The petitioner, therefore, went to Johannesburg in South Africa, which is an adjoining country and filed a pet...
Arunbhai Nilkanthrai Nanavati Vs. Jayaben Prahladbhai and anr. (Throug ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1999
Reported in: [2000]100CompCas828(Guj); (1999)3GLR2096
H.R. Shelat, J.1. The petitioner, against whom a Criminal Case No. 4061 of 1997 is filed in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate (F. C.) at Bhavnagar, relating to the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), prays for setting aside the common order dated June 15, 1998, passed rejecting his applications, exhibits 6, 8 and 10 for quashing of the complaint, and his discharge, etc. 2. The question of vital importance that arises for consideration is, to which bank (paying or collecting), the cheque is to be presented within six months or during its validity period for legal and valid initiation of criminal action under section 138 of the Act 3. facts, necessary for disposal of this application, may, in brief, be stated. The petitioner and opponent No. 1, were having legal transactions. When account was settled, Rs. 1,00,000 were found due to the opponent No. 1 from the petitioner. The petitioner therefore, in order...
Jayesh R. Mor Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR61
ORDER1. Heard Mr. Pahwa for the petitioner, Mr. S. P. Dave, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No. I-State and Ms. Davawala for respondent No. 2. 2. Rule. Mr. S. P. Dave waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No. 1 and Ms. Davawala waives service on behalf of respondent No. 2. 3. The petitioner happened to be a director of one Aashi Leasing & Finance Ltd. The said company failed to file three copies of the balance sheet and profit and loss account of the company by 30th October, 1997, as required under section 220 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') and, therefore, the Registrar of Companies for Gujarat, Dadra and Nagar Haveli lodged complaint against the company and three directors of which present petitioner was shown as accused No. 3, under section 220(3). 4. The petitioner has challenged the said complaint on the ground that it is not maintainable against him. According to the petitioner, at one stage, he was director of the company, but he resigned from...
Gujarat Leather Industries Ltd. Vs. Abdulsattar Gulamrasul Shaikh
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1999
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ11Guj
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. Notice of this writ petition was issued to the respondent vide order dated April 21, 1999. The record shows that the notice was served on the respondent on May 16, 1999. The returnable date was on June 16, 1999 but none appeared on behalf of the respondent on that date. Heading was adjourned to July 1, 1999. Again on July 1, 1999 none appeared from the side of the respondent and it was adjourned to July 10, 1999. July 10, 1999 being second Saturday and July 11, 1999 being Sunday it has come up for hearing today, i.e. July 12, 1999.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I feel that the petition can be finally disposed of at the admission stage more particularly when the respondent has not appeared despite service of notice.3. Through this petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the award dated January 21, 1999 passed by the Labour Court, Bharuch, in Reference No. 47/90 in Annexure-E to the writ petition.4. The brief facts are that the r...
Pravinkumar Ramaniklal Pandya Vs. Mavajibhai Jeram and Santokben Savaj ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR732
J.R. Vora, J.1. These revision applications arise from a judgment and decree passed by the District Court at Rajkot by the Assistant Judge in Regular Civil Appeal Nos.9//93, 10/93 and 11/93.2. As per the brief facts, the present petitioner in both the revision applications was original defendant and present opponent-trust filed two Civil Suits before Small Cause Court at Rajkot, being numbered as Civil Suit No.33/86 and Civil Suit No.98/86. The suit premises mentioned in both the suits were in 1979 let to the tenant which comprising of one shop and the other property comprising of shed, osari, bathroom etc., as described in the respective plaints. Landlord filed Civil Suit No.33/86 for the shed and other property and Civil Suit No.98/86 for the shop property. Since the parties were the same, both the suits were consolidated. Before that one standard rent application filed by the present petitioner numbered as Civil Misc. Appln. No.78/84, regarding the same property was pending before t...
Arunbhai Nilkanthrai Nanavati Vs. Jayaben Prabhudas and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ALT(Cri)3; 2000CriLJ1152
ORDERH.R. Shelat, J.1. The petitioner, against whom a Criminal Case No. 1061 of 1997 is filed in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate (F.C.) at Bhavnagar, relating to the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), prays for setting aside the common order dated 15-6-98 passed rejecting his applications, Ex. 6, 8 & 10, quashing of the complaint, and his discharge etc.2. The question of vital importance that arises for consideration is to which Bank (paying or collecting), the cheque is to be presented within 6 months or during its validity period for legally & validly initiation of criminal action under Section 138 of the Act?3. The facts, necessary for disposal of this application, may, in brief, be stated. The petitioner and opponent No. 1, were having legal transactions. When account was settled, Rs. 1,00,000/- were found due to the opponent No. 1 from the petitioner. The petitioner therefore, in order to fulfil his o...
Firoz Ikbal Rathod Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-12-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR374
K.R. Vyas, J. 1. The original accused nos. 1 and 2 have preferred these appeals challenging the judgment and order dated 19.8.1992 passed in Sessions case No. 95 of 1990 by the learned Sessions Judge, Panchamahals at Godhra, convicting them for the offences punishable under sections 302 and 201 of the IPC. The accused no. 2 was also convicted for the offence under section 404 of the IPC. For the offence under section 302 of the IPC, both the accused were sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo further Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of six months and for the offence under section 201 of the IPC, the accused were sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo further R.I. for three months. For offence under section 404 of the IPC, the accused no. 2 was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to undergo further R.I. for three mon...
Pragjibhai @ Kanubhai Manjibhai Patel Vs. Rasiklal Manganlal Modi and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-09-1999
Reported in: (2000)4GLR561
J.R. Vora, J.1. The present respondent-original plaintiff filed a suit being H.R.P.Suit No.2849 of 1982, in the court of Small Causes at Ahmedabad, against defendant No.1 Manjibhai Dungarbhai Patel and defendant No.2 Pragjibhai alias Kanubhai Manjibhai Patel. During the pendency of the suit, the defendant No.1 Manjibhai Dungarbhai Patel died and hence defendant No.2 Pragjibhai @ Kanubhai Manjibhai Patel who was defendant No.2 being his son and Maniben being his widow and two daughters Bachiben Lilaben and Labhuben were impleaded as heirs. Thereafter defendant No.1/1 wife of Manjibhai Dungarbhai Patel also died and hence son Pragjibhai and two daughters Bachiben @ Lilaben and Labhuben remained as defendants in the suit. The original defendant No.2 Pragjibhai @ Kanubhai Manjibhai Patel has preferred this revision against Rasiklal Maganlal, heir of original plaintiff who died pending suit Maganbhai Dungerbhai Patel and others i.e. Bachiben and Labhuben. The suit was filed on various groun...
Surapsing Jehariya Vasava Vs. State of Gujarat
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR239
ORDER The appeal is allowed. The judgement and order impugned in this judgement rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Session Case No. 77 of 1993 dated 27.8.98 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is in jail and he shall be released forthwith. The fine if paid be returned to the appellant. Direct Service of the operative part be given to the appellant....
State of Gujarat Vs. Dharsing T. Vaghela and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: (2000)1GLR313
R.K. Abichandani, J.1. These two appeals are filed by the State against the judgment and order dated 9.9.1991 of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur in Sessions Case No. 10 of 1988. The Criminal Appeal No. 360 of 1992 is for enhancement of the sentence imposed on the original accused no. 1- Dharsing Tikubha Vaghela for offence punishable under section 304 Part II of the IPC and the other appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 361 of 1992 is against the acquittal of the original accused no. 1 Dharsing Tikubha Vaghela for offence punishable under section 302 of the IPC and the acquittal of accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 i.e. Jenubha Tikubha, Hematsing Kubersing and Tikubha Kubersingh for offences punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of IPC.2. The prosecution version is that on 17.8.1987, which was the day following the day of Gokulashtami, a festival was being celebrated in the honour of Lord Krishna by one Vinubha Cheharsing who had invited young girls of the community for...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »