Gujarat Court March 2000 Judgments
Raisinh P. Bhoi Vs. Dineshbhai Keshavbhai Patel
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-28-2000
Reported in: (2000)3GLR15
M.R. Calla, J.1. This Special Civil Application is directed against the order dated 15.6.99 passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner, Vadodara, Division -Vadodara in Judicial Misc. Application No.24/99. The dispute relates to Charotar Education Society, which is a public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. This Trust is also a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The petitioners Nos.1 and 2 claim to be the members of the aforesaid Trust i.e. petitioner No.3. According to the petitioners, the respondent herein, namely, Dineshbhai Keshavbhai Patel, was a volunteer as understood under the Rules and Regulations of the Trust and he was also appointed as a Secretary of the Council about five years back. The case of the petitioners is that because of high handed behavior of the respondent with the other members of the Trust as also the staff of the Educational Institutions run by the Trust and the students studying thereat, there was an agitati...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Controller, S.T. Corporation, Bhuj Vs. Virji D. Barot
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)GLR153
1. Learned Advocate Mr. K. V. Gadhia is appearing on behalf of the petitioner Corporation and learned advocate Mr. J. S. Brahmbhatt is appearing on behalf of the respondent workmen. In the present petition, the notice has been issued by this Court returnable on 7th March, 2000. When the matter was taken up for hearing, both the learned advocates requested this Court to dispose of the said petition finally. With a consent to that, Rule has been issued today and Mr. Brahmbhatt is waiving the service of Rule on behalf of the respondent. 2. In the present petition, the petitioner Corporation has challenged the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Approval Application No. 132 of 1996 dated 10th June, 1999. Both the learned advocates submitted that in the present petition, this Court can examine the validity of the punishment imposed by the petitioner Corporation against the respondent workman and decide on merits, the question of penalty as if powers has been exercised unde...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Controller, G.S.R.T.C. Vs. Dhirajlal Z. Kotak
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: [2000(86)FLR112]; (2001)4GLR3770; (2000)IILLJ86Guj
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Learned Advocate Mr. K. V. Gadhia is appearing on behalf of the petitioner Corporation and learned advocate Mr. J. S. Brahmbhatt is appearing on behalf of the respondent workman. 2. The brief facts of the present petition is that the respondent workman was working as a conductor at Rajkot Division on June 10, 1995. His bus was checked at Gondal College Chowk. It was found that he had not issued tickets to 4 passengers of two groups and the way bill was closed. In pursuant to the said allegations, he was issued chargesheet on September 11, 1995 and thereafter the Departmental inquiry was held against him and ultimately the respondent workman was dismissed from service on June 23, 1996 as in the past also, there were 13 cases of misconduct by the respondent workman. The petitioner Corporation had filed Approval Application before the Industrial Tribunal bearing No. 231 of 1996 in Reference (I.T.) No. 108 of 1996. The Industrial Tribunal had rejected the said Approval Ap...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmanbhai B. Chelani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Guj1; (2000)3GLR2146
ORDERM.S. Shah, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the communication dated 14-7-1999 (Annexure 'I' to the petition) rejecting the petitioner's application for referring the dispute against telephone bills to arbitration under Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.2. The petitioner is a telephone subscriber having telephone Nos. 54044 and 56544. The petitioner received telephone bill for the month of December, 1997 for an amount of Rs. 24,167/- in respect of telephone No. 54044 and also bill for the month of November, 1997 for an amount of Rs. 7,319/- in respect of telephone No. 56544. The petitioner lodged complaint against the said bills as being excessive. The respondents ultimately called upon the petitioner to pay Rs. 29,609/- by 20-2-1998 or else face disconnection of telephones. The petitioner filed Regular Civil Suit No. 43/98 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (S.D.), Palanpur for challenging the aforesaid bil...
Tag this Judgment!Thakore Nandaben Jasuji Vs. Thakore Lakshmiben Ataji and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2000)3GLR29
C.K. Thakkar, J.1. This petition is filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dt. February 17, 1999 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mehsana in Election Petition No.3 of 1997.2. The case of the petitioner is that she is a permanent resident of village Chaluva, Taluka and District Mehsana. Election for the office of Sarpanch of Chaluva Gram Panchayat was held on February 10, 1997. The election was held in accordance with the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Elections Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Gujarat Panchayats Elections Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the ' the Rules'). According to the petitioner, at the time of first counting, the petitioner obtained 773 votes, whereas the respondent no.1 obtained 779 votes. Thus, the respondent no.1 obtained more votes than the petitioner and accordingly, she was declared as elected candidate for the office of Sarpanch under Rule 60 ...
Tag this Judgment!Baroda Municipal Corporation Vs. Narendra Manilal Shah
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-27-2000
Reported in: (2001)GLR124
H.K. Rathod, J.1. Laws though in themselves never so wise and pious are but a dead letter and of little force except there be a due and impartial execution of them.2. The weaker sections of Indian Humanity have been deprived of justice for long years, they have had no access to justice on account of their poverty, ignorance and illiteracy. They are not aware of the rights and benefits conferred upon them by the Constitution and the law. On account of their socially and economically disadvantaged position, they lack the capacity to assert their rights and they do not have the material resources with which to enforce their social and economic entitlements and combat exploitation and injustice.3. The concern shown by the law to the poor and disadvantaged is much greater than that shown to the rich and the well to do because the latter can on account of their dominant social and economic position and large material resources, resist aggression on their rights whereas the poor and the depri...
Tag this Judgment!Pam Pharmaceuticals Vs. Richardson Vicks Inc. and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: (2001)1GLR125
A. R. Dave, J.1. Being aggrieved by an order dated 6-4-1999 passed belowthe Notice of Motion in Civil Suit No. 854 of 1999, the appellant-original defendant No. 1 has approached this Court by way of this appeal from order. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the litigation have been referred to as they have been arrayed before the trial Court. The appellant, defendant No. 1, has been aggrieved by the impugned order because, by virtue of the impugned order, during pendency of the suit, defendant No. 1 has been restrained from using mark 'VICAS' or any other mark, which is likely to infringe trade mark 'VICKS' which is being used by the plaintiffs. Moreover, defendant No. 1 has also been restrained from manufacturing, selling or offering for sale, medicinal preparation and allied products using trade mark 'VICAS' or any other trade mark which might be deceptively similar to trade mark 'VICKS' of the plaintiffs.2, The facts giving rise to the litigation, as stated by the plaintiff...
Tag this Judgment!Noorbanu Haji Hasan Vs. Havabai Haji Hasan and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: (2001)2GLR1026
S.K. Keshote, J.1. This revision application is directed by the defendant-petitioner against the order of the Civil Judge, Una dated 24-6-1999 in Regular Civil Suit No. 89 of 1996 below Exh. 148.2. It is really shocking and surprising that the members of the Bar in the Court have little care of the matters which are to be presented. Not only this even they do not bother to read the papers, before same are to be presented in the Court. It is a duty of the members of the Bar to present each and every paper after they themselves read it, so that there may be any chance of errors, omissions and mistakes. Sometimes, very glaring mistakes are being noticed in the Memo of the revisions, appeals and applications etc. This is a case where I find glaring mistake in the memo of revision application. The order is dated 24-6-1999 which is impugned in this revision application is passed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1. The application filed by the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 for change of...
Tag this Judgment!Parents Associations and anr. Vs. Board of Governors Sainik School and ...
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: AIR2000Guj250; (2000)4GLR472
ORDERJ.N. Bhatt, J.1. Rule, service of which is waived by learned Advocate Mr. Sunil K. Shah on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. J.S. Yadav on behalf of respondent No. 3. In view of the urgency involved in the matter, and at the request of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up, today, for final disposal. Whether the revision of tuition fees and mess charges and the resultant additional payment by the students of Sainik School, by virtue of circular dated 18-6-99 and the letter dated 1-7-99 is legal and valid or not, is the sole and substantial question which has surfaced in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for determination and adjudication.2. Conspectus of material facts leading to the rise of this petition may, shortly, be articulated, at this juncture, so as to examine the merits of the petition and the challenge against it.3. Petitioner No. 1 is the Parents Association and petitioner No. 2 is a student of Sain...
Tag this Judgment!Chamar Ramjibhai Khimabhai Vs. Mirza Nurmahmmadbhai Amirbhai and anr.
Court: Gujarat
Decided on: Mar-24-2000
Reported in: (2000)3GLR778
C.K. Thakkar, J.1. This petition is filed for quashing and setting aside an order passed by the Deputy Collector, Wadhawan City Division, Surendranagar on November 13, 1997 in an application bearing Electricity Case No. 6 of 1997 and confirmed by the District Judge, Surendranagar on 24th July, 1998 in Civil Revision Application No. 1 of 1998.2. The case of the petitioner was that he was a tenant of premises which was of the ownership of respondent no. 1 herein at a monthly rent of Rs. 25/-. It was also his case that a hut was situated on the disputed land and since the petitioner wanted electricity connection, he made an application under Section 23A of the Bombay Rents, Hotels & Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The said section provides that when a tenant desires supply of an electricity power at his own costs, he has to obtain consent of his landlord. If the consent is not given by the landlord, the section enables a tenant to apply to the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »